-^^^MwFPRMi^ 


BV  811  .H689  1858 
Hodges,  William,  d.  1881? 
Baptism  tested  by  scripture 
and  history 


BAPTISM 


BY  SCRIPTUEE  AND  HISTOEY ; 


THE    TEACHIXG   OF    THE    HOLY    SCRIPTURES,    AXD   THE   PRACTICE    AND 
TEACHING  OF  THE   CHRISTIAN   CHURCH  IN  EVERY  AGE    SUC- 
CEEDING THE  APOSTOLIC,  COMPARED  IN    RELATION 
TO  THE  SUBJECTS  AND  MODES  OF  BAPTISM. 


BY  THE 

REV.  WILLIAM  HODGES,  A.  M., 

RKCTOR  OF  TRINITY  CHURCH,  COVINGTON,  KENTUCKT. 

SECOND    EDITION,    REVISED    AND    ENLARGED 


•Prove  all  things:  hold  fast  that  which  is  ffood."— St.  Pacl, 


PHILADELPHIA : 

H.  HOOKER  &  CO.,  PUBLISHERS^ AND  BOOKSELLERS, 

S.  W.  CORNER  CHESTNUT  AND  EIGHTH  STREETS. 

1858. 


Entered  according  to  Act  of  Congress,  in  the  year  1858,  by 

H.  HOOKER  &  CO., 

iu  the  Clerk's  Office  of  the  District  Court  of  the  United  States  for  the  Eastern 
District  of  Pennsylrania. 


HENRY   B.   ASHMKAD,   BOOK   AM)  JOE   PKIXTEII, 

George  Street  above  Eleventh 


PREFACE 


The  second  edition  of  this  work  comes  before  tlic  public  revised 
and  much  enlarged.  Besides  new  proofs  of  the  authority  of  Infant 
Baptism,  and  a  more  thorough  examination  of  its'  relations  to  Cir- 
cumcision, the  Mode  or  Modes  of  Baptism,  Imve  been  added,  and 
further  investigation  of  the  rise  and  progress  of  the  Baptist  Church 
and  Baptist  principles. 

The  general  plan  and  arrangement  of  the  book  are  the  same.  The 
Baptism  of  Infants  is  traced,  first,  to  the  Apostolic  Age.  The  laws 
of  interpretation  are  then  discussed,  and  the  use  and  application  of 
the  word  baptism  and  kindred  words  b}-  the  Apostles,  and  by  writers 
of  the  next  age,  compared. 

In  treating  of  the  Modes  of  Baptism,  concerning  which  Baptists 
change  their  mode  of  argument  from  a  negative  to  a  positive  kind, 
they  are  met  on  their  own  ground  ;  and  first,  the  application  and 
meaning  of  the  word  Baptism  as  used  by  New  Testament  writers,  are 
considered  ;  second,  the  precepts  and  examples  of  Christ  and  his 
Apostles  ;  third,  the  figurative  language  and  allusions  in  the  New 
Testament ;  and  fourth,  the  use  of  language  and  teaching  of  Apos- 
tolic men  and  their  successors. 

The  author  having  devoted  much  time  to  the  study  of  these  sub- 
jects, and  read  all  the  works  that  he  could  obtain  in  the  American 

1* 


VI  PREFACE. 

market  that  treat  particularly  upon  them,  without  regard  to  names 
or  shades  of  faith,  has  used  the  information  thus  acquired  in  the  way 
which  he  supposed  would  develop  most  clearly  and  enforce  most 
successfully  the  truth. 

And  although  he  has  made  free  use  of  the  information  obtained 
from  every  legitimate  source,  he  has  always  given  credit  to  the  pro- 
per authorities,  when  conscious  of  using  their  own  words,  or  of  ex- 
pressing his  views  in  similar  language. 

He  has  not  regarded  the  effects  of  Baptism  as  coming  within  the 
purview  of  his  legitimate  work,  and  ha^  therefore  cited  the  testimony 
and  doctrines  of  writers  bearing  on  points  at  issue,  irrespective  of 
their  shibboleths,  leaving  to  others  to  draw  their  own  inferences. 
And  whilst  he  hop.es  his  readers  will  follow  the  order  marked  out  for 
them,  he  would  call  the  attention  of  mothers  particularly  to  the  latter 
portion  of  the  eighth  chapter,  and  that  of  his  Baptist  brethren  to  the 
closing  part  of  the  book. 


CONTENTS. 


CHAPTER    I 


ARE    LITTLE    CHILDREN    EMBRACED    IN    THE    TERMS     OF    THE    CHRISTIAN 
COVENANT  ?  . 

Preliminary  Remarks — Nature  of  the  Testimony — Removal  of  ex- 
traneous matter — State  of  the  Question — Point  at  issue — Prin- 
ciples of  Interpretation— Practice  of  all  Ancient  Churches — 
Origin  of  Antipedobaptists— Infant  Baptism  traced— Constantly 
referred  to  in  the  Pelagian  Controversy — Admitted  to  be  the 
Rule  of  the  Universal  Church  by  Pelagius  and  Celestius — 
Council  of  Carthage,  214  Bishops  present — Council  of  Milevium 
— Synodical  Letter  from  Africa 13 


CHAPTER    II. 

HISTORICAL    TESTIMONY   CONTINUED. 

Testimony  of  Council  of  Carthage — Aurelius — Donatists — Chrysos- 
tom — Baptism,  Christian  Circumcision — Original  sin — Benefits 
of  Baptism — Jerome — Augustine  — Ambrose  — Optatus  —  Nazi- 
anzen — Basil — Council  of  Eliberis — Council  of  Carthage,  66 
Bishops  present,  Cyprian  presiding — Tertullian        _        -        -        38 


Vlll  CONTENTS. 

CHAPTER    III. 

HISTORICAL    TESTIMONY    CONTINUED. 

Origen  born  of  Christian  parents — His  piety,  learning  and  travels 
— His  declaration  that  Infant  Baptism  is  the  usage  of  the  whole 
Church,  handed  down  by  the  Apostles — Care  of  early  Christians 
to  preserve  the  true  faith — Ireneus  hearer  of  Polycarp,  the 
pupil  of  St.  John — His  zeal  for  Apostolic  usage — Use  of  the 
term  regeneration,  and  testimony  to  the  Baptism  of  all  ages — 
Agreement  of  various  sects  on  this  pont — Interpretation  of  St. 
John  iii.  5,  and  Titus  iii.  5-------         71 


CHAPTER    IV. 

TESTIMONY    HISTORICAL    AND    CIRCUMSTANTIAL. 

Testimony  of  Justin  Martyr,  born  at  the  close  of  the  Apostolic  age, 
in  the  midst  of  Christians — Many  baptized  in  childhood — 
Gentile  Christians  received  circumcision  in  baptism — Interpre- 
tation of  Col.  ii.  11,  12— Clemens  Romauus — All  ages  corrupt, 
and  remedy  provided  before. born,  or  necessity  of  putting  all 
into  a  new  state — Hermas — Necessity  of  baptism  to  all — In- 
fants, and  those  who  continvie  Infants  without  malice,  most 
honorable  of  all — Interpretation  of  St.  John  iii.  5 — Christian 
Church  organized  before  New  Testament  written — Infant  Bap- 
tism before  New  Testament  canon  settled— Universal  in  the 
next  age  after  the  Apostles — Improbability  of  so  notable  an  in- 
novation without  opposition  in  that  period — The  adherence  to 
"  the  one  only  faith"  by  Polycarp,  Ireneus  and  Christians  im- 
mediately succeeding  the  Apostles— Summary  of  historical  and 
circumstantial  evidence   -        -        -        -         --        -        -        ^7 


CHAPTER    V. 

RELATION    OF    BAPTISM    TO    CIRCUMCISION. 

A  church  on  earth  Avhen  Christ  came— The  temple  and  synagogue 
services — Preceded  by  the  Tabernacle  with  its  altar,  mercy  seat 
and  consecrated  ministers — preceded  by  the  Abraham ic  and 
patriarchial  dispensations— Circumcision  the  outward  token  of 


CONTENTS.  IX 

the  Abrahamic  covenant,  sealing  spiritual  and  temporal  promises 
— Abraham  made  the  father  of  a  spiritual  seed,  in  virtue  of 
being  at  the  head  of  a  covenant  bearing  the  seal  of  the  righte- 
ousness of  faith — This  covenant  perpetual — Mosaic  dispensa- 
tion added  to  it — Circumcision  continued  to  the  coming  of 
Christ,  "  the  promised  seed" — The  change  of  the  seal  from  cir- 
cumcision to  baptism  did  not  affect  the  right  of  Infants — The 
law  for  their  membership  having  not  been  repealed,  they  have 
the  same  claim  to  baptism  that  they  had  to  circumcision — 
Baptism  called  Chris.tian  circumcision  by  primitive  Christians 
— Held  the  same  place  in  the  same  church  while  circumcision 
has  passed  away 134 


CHAPTER    VI. 

RELATION    OF    CIRCUMCISION    AND    BAPTISM,    CONCLUDED. 

St.  Paul's  definition  of  circumcision — Exposition  of  the  moral  law 
under  Moses — Old  Testament  appealed  to  by  Christ  and  his 
Apostles — Transfer  of  the  kingdom — Branches  of  the  wild  olive 
grafted  into  the  good  olive  tree — Strangers  and  foreigners  made 
fellow- citizens  with  the  saints — New  and  better  covenant — 
New  and  old,  comparative  terms — Basis  of  the  Christian 
Church — Gentiles  brought  in  with  Jews — Faith  of  parents  avail 
for  their  children — Hannah — Nobleman — ^Woman  of  Canaan — 
Religion  always  a  family  thing — Baptism  on  the  faith  of  the 
parent — Syriac  version  of  the  Holy  Scriptures  .        -         .       160 


CHAPTER    VII. 

TESTIMONY    OF    THE    HOLY    SCRIPTURES. 

The  Grand  Commission  to  the  Apostles  to  baptize  all  nations — 
True  principles  of  Interpretation— Infants  had  been  always 
members  of  the  Church,  and  no  restriction  now  made  in  regard  to 
them — Jewish  practice  with  Proselytes — Talmud  and  Mishna — 
Objection  to  baptizing  before  teaching,  answered — The  Church 
a  School — Objection  to  the  want  of  faith  in  little  Children, 
answered — Christ's  treatment  of  little  children  shows  they  were 
not  to  be  regarded  as  "aliens  and  strangers"  to  his  kingdom — 


CONTENTS. 

True  rendering  "of  such  is  the  kingdom  of  God" — The  promise 
to  children  repeated  in  the  first  sermon  under  the  Gospel  Com- 
mission— Family  baptisms — Lydia  and  her  children,  the  Jailer 
and  all  his,  and  the  family  of  Stephanus — Meaning  of  01x05 
*' house" — In  the  absence  of  demonstration,  the  greater  pro- 
bability, the  law  of  action — Claims  of  duty  between  an  old 
established  rite,  and  supposed  error         -        _        _         _        -       179 


CHAPTER    VIII. 

TESTIMONY    OP    THE    HOLY    SCRIPTURES,    CONCLUDED. 

Laws  of  marriage  among  the  Jews — The  holy  seed  not  allowed  to 
mingle  with  heathen  nations — Such  marriages  dissolved  in 
times  of  reformation— Heathen  wives  and  children  put  away — 
Difficulties  suggested  in  regard  to  "  believing  and  unbelieving" 
husbands  and  wives  under  the  new  dispensation — Ceremonial 
law  not  applicable — Positive  influence  from  believer  on  unbe- 
liever fits  the  latter  for  their  union,  hence  the  children  are  holy 
and  not  unclean — Holy  and  unclean  always  used  in  a  ceremo- 
nial or  religious  sense — Children  numbered  among  the  holy 
and  saints  by  St.  Paul — Their  parents  instructed  how  to  train 
them — St.  John  divides  the  members  of  the  Church  into  three 
classes,  fathers,  young  men  and  little  children — Summary  of 
testimony — Earnest  exhortation  to  the  faithful  training  of  our 
little  ones  for  Christ's  spiritual  kingdom 229 


CHAPTER    IX. 

MODE    OR    MODES    OF    BAPTISM. 

Meaning  of  "Words — Language  of  the  New  Testament — Septuagint, 
and  Jewish  Customs — Divers  Baptisms — Water  of  Separation — 
Ritual  Purifications — Oriental  Washing — Baptism  a  Generic 
Term — John's  Baptism — Prophecies  of  Isaiah — Ezekiel — Ma- 
lachi — Baptism  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  poured  out,  shed  forth  or 
fell  upon,  descended — Baptism  applied  to  the  various  Ablutions 
of  the  Ritual  Law — No  English  Word  will  supply  its  place — 
Immersion  not  its  true  meaning — No  Mode  implied  in  the 
term — No  Specific  Directions  in  regard  to  it — Circumstances  of 
each  case  must  be  examined 280 


CONTENTS.  XI 

CHAPTER    X. 

EXAMINATION  OP  THE  MEANING  AND  MODES  OP  BAPTISM,  CONTINUED. 

John's  Baptism — Prepositions  "  in,"  "  into,"  and  "  out  of,"  deter- 
mine nothing — iEnon  or  Springs — Apostles  baptized  without 
regard  to  circumstances — Baptism  of  three  thousand — of  the 
Samaritans — of  the  Eunuch — of  Saul — of  Cornelius — of  the 
Jailer — of  the  Disciples  at  Ephesus — Mode  indicated  only  by 
the  Spirit — End  of  Baptism — Christ  the  second  Adam — Circum- 
cision of  Christ — Figurative  allusions — Explanations — Sum- 
mary of  Scriptural  testimony — Concluded  with  historical  proof 
of  Baptism  by  different  modes  in  every  age  of  the  Church  since 
the  death  of  the  Apostles         -         -         -        -         -        -         -312 

CHAPTER    XI. 

BAPTISM    BY   DIFFERENT    MODES   VALID    IN    EVERY   AGE    OP    THE    CHURCH. 

At  the  time  of  the  Reformation — Church  of  Geneva — at  Mentz — 
Council  of  Cologne — English  Church — Lynwood's  Constitution 
— Wickliflfe — Langres — Synod  of  Angers — Thomas  Aquinas — 
Bonaventura — Strabo — Gennadius — Augustine — Chrysostom — 
Jerome — Athanasius — Gregory  Nazianzen — Basil — Baptism  of 
Constantino — Washing  before  Pouring — Cyprian — Lawrence 
and  Romanus  —  Novatian  —  Basilides  —  Origen  —  TertuUian — 
Clemens  Alexandrinus — Justin  Martyr — Baptism  of  Christ — 
Cataconab  of  Pontianus — Reasons  for  no  prescribed  Mode — 
Essence  and  Incidents — Supper  and  Baptism — Greek  Church — 
Mar  Yohannan — Examination  of  Principles — Summary  -        -      347 


CHAPTER    XII. 

HISTORY   OP    THE    BAPTIST    CHURCH    EXAMINED. 

Modern  Organization — Waldenses  and  their  Faith — Albigenses — 
Pierre  De  Bruys — Cathari  —  PAterini — Paulicians  —  Bulgari 
Donatists  —  Novatians  —  Bede — Pelagius — Ancient  Church  of 
Briton — Rome — Greece — Alexandria — Palestine — Coast  of  Mal- 
abar—Rise  of  Antipedobaptists  in  Twelfth  Century — Collected 
together  in  1521 — Munster  taken  in  1533 — Retaken  next  year — 
Anabaptists  Scattered — Rallied  under  Mano  1536 — Confession 
of  Faith  published  1636— First  Church,  in  England  1638— In 
America  1639 — Present  position  and  Concluding  Remarks         -      383 


CHAPTER  I. 


ARK  LITTLE    CHILDREN   EMBUACED  IN  THE   TERMS^  OF  THE 
CHRISTIAN    COVENANT  ? 

Preliminary  Remarks — Nature  of  the  Testimony — Removal  of  extraneous 
matter — State  of  the  Question — Point  at  issue — Princijiles  of  Interpre- 
tation— Practice  of  all  Ancient  Churches — Origin  of  Antipedobaptists — 
Infant  Baptism  traced — Constantly  referred  to  in  the  Pelagian  Contro- 
versy'— Admitted  to  be  the  Rule  of  the  Universal  Church  by  Pelagius 
and  Celestius — Council. of  Carthage,  214  Bishops  present — Council  of 
Milevium — Sjniodical  Letter  from  Africa. 

The  ruling  desire  of  every  heart  should  be,  to  em- 
brace the  truth,  only  the  trutli,  and  the  ivhole  truth  con- 
tained in  the  system  of  Religion  taught  by  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ.  No  man  has  the  right  to  erect  for  himself 
a  standard  lower  than  this.  Nor  to  reject  any  means, 
within  his  reach,  that  will  aid  him  in  the  attainment  of 
Gospel  truth.  The  Holy  Scriptures  being  our  rule  of 
faith,  our  first  duty  is  to  endeavor  to  understand  them. 

When  tiuo  opposing  doctrines  are  drawn  from  their 
holy  pages,  it  is  certain  that  one  is  wrong.  Both  can- 
not be  right.  Truth  calls  for  an  investigation  of  the 
claims  of  each.  The  principles  of  interpretation  on 
which  they  depend  should  be  examined^  and  their  true 
meaning  earnestly  sought  out. 

How  do  men  proceed  in  such  cases  witli  other  Annient 


14  PRELIMINARIES. 

writings  f  All  readers  of  the  ancient  classics  know, 
that  in  order  to  ascertain  the  entire  meaning  of  passages 
found  on  almost  every  page  of  such  writings,  we  must 
make  ourselves  acquainted  with  the  customs,  laws  and 
various  institutions  of  the  country  and  age  of  the  writer. 
And  when  called  on  to  decide  between  the  opposing  in- 
terpretations of  Annotators,  we  bring  to  our  aid  all  the 
light  that  can  be  obtained /rom  every  source.  Shall  we 
observe  less  care  and  diligence  in  the  interpretation  of 
the  ancient  records  of  the  Holy  Scriptures  ?  Is  it  more 
important  to  ascertain  the  full  meaning  of  the  ancient 
classics,  than  the  true  intent  of  the  writers  of  the  Bible  ? 
Surely  this  will  not  be  admitted  ?  What  then  ?  Shall 
we  take  for  granted  there  is  nothing  in  the  Scriptures 
"hard  to  be  understood  " — nothing  but  what  is  plain  to 
the  most  illiterate  reader — and  about  which  all  men  may 
easily  agree  ?  The  Divine  record  itself^  as  well  as  facts 
numerous  testify  to  the  contrary. 

On  the  subject  of  our  present  inquiry,  the  conduct  of 
many  who  call  themselves  Christians  is  truly  lament- 
able !  They  take  up  the  New  Testament,  read  over  the 
English  translation  in  a  cursory  manner,  interpret  it 
without  any  regard  to  the  circumstances  under  which  the 
events  and  teaching  therein  recorded  took  place,  and  not 
finding  the  doctrine  of  Infant  baptism  taught  in  the  way 
which  they  had  marked  out  for  it  in  their  own  imagina- 
tions, they  discard  it,  and  refuse  to  hear  anything  more 
concerning  it ! 

In  this  way  half  of  the  doctrines  of  our  holy  religion 
may  be  rejected.  Aye,  the  tvliole  Scriptures  of  both  the 
Old  and  Ncav  ^IVstaments  ;   and  hence,  the  wliole  of  oijr 


PRELIMINARIES.  15 

religion  !  Some  even  go  so  far  as  to  presci'ibe  ^^  a  plain, 
positive  jjrecept  or  example,''  as  necessary  to  their  recep- 
tion of  this  doctrine  !  Such  presumption  need  not  be 
noticed  here,  however,  further  than  to  ask — "  Who  hath 
known  the  mind  of  the  Lord,  or  who  hath  been  his 
counselor?"  Is  it  not  his  to  command,  and  ours  to 
obey  ? 

A  clearly  implied  duty  is  as  binding,  as  one  made 
known  in  any  other  way.  Our  business  in  such  cases,  is 
to  examine  testimony,  not  to  prescribe  ivliat  kind  it  shall 
be.  Be  it  express  or  implied,  direct  or  circumstantial, 
we  must  hear  it,  and  give  it  the  authority  to  which  it  is 
entitled.  God,  our  Supreme  Lawgiver,  has  the  right  to 
teach  us  in  any  way  that  he  pleases ;  and  if  any  truth 
or  duty  be  clearly  implied  in  his  holy  word,  it  is  at  our 
peril,  that  wd  reject  or  neglect  it.  We  are  not  permit- 
ted to  dictate  the  mode,  in  which  He  shall  teach  us.  But 
must  thankfully  receive  his  instructions  in  lohatever  tvay 
he  may  choose  to  give  them.  Thousands  split  on  this 
rock  !  Hhej  prescribe  beforehand  the  tuay,  in  which  In- 
fant baptism  must  be  made  known — not  remembering 
that  the  Church  was  planted  before  the  New  Testament 
Scriptures  were  written — that  it  was  only  necessary  to 
allude  to  many  things  because  well  known  to  all,  at  the 
time — and  that  the  Evangelical  record  is  a  very  concise 
statement  of  the  sayings  and  doings  of  Christ  and  his 
Apostles,  preserving  merely  the  seeds,  for  the  future 
use  of  the  Church — we  say,  not  bearing  in  mind  these 
things,  they  do  not  govern  their  expectations  according- 
ly, and  hence  not  finding  Infant  baptism  set  forth  in  that 
bold  relief  ^^\\\Q\\  they  anticipated,  they  reject  it,  without 


16  PRELIMINARIES. 

making  a  thorough  examination  of  the  subject.  In  the 
same  way  the  Jews  rejected  the  Saviour  !  They  had 
pictured  in  imagination,  a  royal  personage  in  pomp  and 
splendor,  to  which  the  meek  and  lowly  Jesus  did  not  cor- 
respond, when  he  came,  and  before  examining  sufficiently 
to  discover  that  He  was  the  promised  Messiah,  they  re- 
jected him !  as  others  do  now  many  of  his  doctrines  ! 

2.  Another  obstacle  that  stands  in  the  way  of  an  im- 
partial examination  of  this  question  is,  the  want  of  clear 
and  definite  vieivs  of  what  is  embraced  in  the  inquiry. 
Many  associate  with  Infant  baptism  the  mode  of  baptiz- 
ing. Supposing  the  mode  to  be  included  in  the  ques- 
tion at  issue.  As  if  young  children  could  not  be  bap- 
tized in  any  way,  that  you  may  baptize  an  adult.  Again, 
certain  abuses  that  have  been  witnessed  in  the  baptizing 
of  children,  are  often  associated  with  the  ordinance,  as 
if  a  part  of  the  question  itself — but  what  institutions 
may  not  be  abused  ? 

In  order  to  enter,  upon  an  impartial  examination 
of  this  question,  all  these  obstacles  must  be  removed. 
The  examiner  should  free  his  mind  from  all  previous 
bias /or  or  against  Infant  baptism;  lay  aside  all  pre- 
conceived notions  as  to  the  hind  and  degree  of  evidence  ; 
remove  from  the  question  itself  all  extraneous  matter, 
and  place  before  him  the  simple  inquiry — "  Is  Infant 
baptism  a  Divine  Institution,  or  is  it  not  ? 

3.  Bearing  in  mind  these  preliminaries,  and  thus  re- 
lieving the  question  of  much  unnecessary  incumbrance — 
we  may  next  inquire  into  the  state  of  the  controversy. 
For  Infant  baptism  is  not  a  question  which  has  just  be- 
inm    to  be  controverted.     It  has  been   in   the   field  of 


PRELIMINARIES.  17 

Theological  warfare  more  than  three  centuries,  and  the 
cause  of  occasional  debate  more  than  six.  During  the 
last  fifty  years  Antipedobapti^ts*  have  labored  with 
great  zeal  and  energy  to  spread  their  principles  in  newly 
settled  countries,  but  they  are  yet  few  in  number,  com- 
pared with  those  who  baptize  children.  All  the  Ancient 
Churches  now  In  existence,  without  an  exception,  still 
baptize  Infants,  and  contend  that  the  Apostles  and  their 
successors  did  the  same.  And  more  than  seven- eighths 
of  those  bearing  more  modern  names  adhere  to  the  same 
rite ;  for  which  they  claim  the  authority  of  Scripture 
and  History ;  and  challenge  the  proof  of  a  single  sect 
(which  baptized  at  all,)  that  did  not  baptize  little  chil- 
dren during  the  first  thousand  years  of  Christianity., 
To  all  this,  Antipedobaptists  reply, — that  although  it 
was  the  general  custom  of  Christians  to  baptize  Infants, 
for  a  long  series  of  years,  it  had  its  beginning  after  the 
death  of  the  Apostles — yet  they  admit  that  they  do  not 
know  in  what  way  or  at  what  particular  time  it  was  in- 
troduced. 

4.  Such  being  the  state  of  the  case,  we  ask  how  shall 
this  controversy  be  settled  ?  It  will  perhaps  be  replied, 
let  both  parties  go  to  the  Scriptures  This  they  have 
done,  but  difier  in  their  interpretations  on  this  point. 
Various  passages  are  pointed  out  by  one  party — saying, 
"  Here  it  Is  commanded,"  "  there  it  Is  again  implied" — 
"  that  passage  takes  for  granted  the  church-membership 
of  little  children" — "this  alludes  to  the  same  thing," — 
and  so  on.  But  the  other  denying,  refers  them  all  to 
something  else. 

*  Now  generally  called  Baptists. 


18  rilELIMINARIES. 

Must  they  thus  separate  forever  ?  Always  continue 
In  this  state  of  opposition  to  each  other  ?  Shall  the 
Church  of  Christ  be  thus  rent  in  twain,  and  a  schism 
perpetuated  to  the  end  of  time,  notwithstanding  the  Sa- 
viour himself  prayed  the  Father,  that  his  followers 
might  '^  all  be  one,  as  he  and  his  Father  were  one?" 
And  when  the  Apostle  Paul  also,  with  so  much  earnest- 
ness enjoins  it  on  Christians  that  there  should  be  no  di- 
visions among  them?  saying,  '•^ Notu  I  beseech  you, 
brethren,  by  the  name  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  that  ye 
all  speak  the  same  thing,  and  that  there  be  no  divisions 
among  you,  but  that  ye  be  verjectly  joined  together  in  the 
same  mind  and  in  the  same  judgment.'"'^  Surely,  if  we 
desire  to  obey  the  injunctions  of  Divine  writ,  ayc  must 
desire  to  see  this  controversy  brought  to  a  close.  •  And 
if  we  love  truth,  if  w^e  love  peace,  if  we  love  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  we  will  avail  ourselves  of  all  lawful  means 
to  find  truth,  preserve  peace,  and  honor  our  blessed  Re- 
deemer. 

5.  Now  there  are  principles  of  interpretation  receiv- 
ed and  applied  to  other  ancient  writings,  and  likewise 
to  other  portions  of  the  Holy  Scriptures,  which,  if  ap- 
plied to  these  disputed  passages,  will  show  on  which  side 
the  truth  lies.  There  are  also  the  writings  of  early 
Christian  authors,  Avho  lived  in  the  next  age  after  the 
Apostles,  that  will  aid  us  in  this  matter.  Writers  who 
were  members  of  the  Church,  and  who  devoted  their 
lives  to  the  cause  of  Christ,  suffering  some  of  them,  even 
unto  death  in  defence  of  the  Gospel.  Shall  we  hesitate 
to  consult  them  on  this  point — whether  so  notable  a  thing 

*  1  Cor.  i.  10. 


rRELlxMl.XAKIES.  19 

as  Infant  baptism  was  practiced  in  their  day?  Whether 
a  public  ordinance  of  the  Church,  about  which  they 
could  not  be  deceived,  was  then  observed  ?  Surely  not. 
They  had  eyes  as  well  as  we  :  they  had  memories  too. 
And  if  pious,  conscientious  men,  why  refuse  their  testi- 
mony to  that  which  is  the  object  of  the  senses  and  of 
public  notoriety  ?  If  they  speak  of  the  baptizing  of 
young  children  in  their  writings,  why  not  believe  they 
speak  the  truth  in  this,  as  in  other  things  ?  Is  it  to  be 
presumed,  they  would  refer  to  a  thing  which  had  no  ex- 
istence ?  And  if  we  cannot  trust  to  their  testimony  on 
a  point  of  this  kind,  how  shall  we  trust  their  testimony 
in  regard  to  the  different  books  of  the  New  Testament  ? 
To  whose  writings  do  we  now  appeal  in  support  of  the 
genuineness  of  each  book?*  To  the  same  which  we  now 
propose  as  witnesses  to  Infant  baptism.  And  what  in- 
ducement could  they  have  had  to  deceive  us  in  regard  to 
an  ordinance  of  our  religion,  that  did  not  operate  in  re- 
gard to  the  books  of  the  same  ?  They  were  as  well 
qualified — even  better  qualified,  to  testify  to  a  public 
practice  like  Infant  baptism,  than  to  the  authenticity  of 
the  different  manuscripts  sent  to  the  various  churches. 
And  therefore,  consistency,  as  well  as  love  for  the  truth 
require,  that  if  we  receive  their  testimony  to  the  one, 
we  should  to  the  other  also.  We  are  obliged  to  receive 
it  as  to  the  Scriptures — how  then  can  we  reject  it  as  to 
Infant  baptism  ?  And  here  we  remark  for  such  as  have 
not  for  themselves  drawn  the  distinction — that  there  is  a 
wide  difference  between  the  testimony  of  early  Chris- 
tians to  facts,  and  their  mere  opinion  as  to  doctrines. 

*  This  subject  will  be  discussed  in  another  place. 


"20  PRELIMINARIES. 

We  may  receive  the  former  and  give  it  all  the  credit  of  a 
qualified  witness,  whilst  the  latter  should  be  received  as 
we  receive  the  opinion  of  other  Christians,  making  due 
allowance  for  the  advantages  of  time,  place,  and  other 
circumsta*nces.*  Respect  is  due  the  opinions  and  com- 
mentaries of  early  Christians,  because  from  their  near- 
ness to  the  Apostles,  they  possessed  many  facilities 
of  ascertaining  their  teachings  which  we  do  not.  But 
the  testimony  of  the  Fathers  as  to  facts  must  be  regard- 
ed as  something  more  than  the  mere  opinions  of  good 
men, — must  be  received  as  valid  testimony  to  the  truth 
to  which  they  depose.  Just  as  we  regard  the  testimony 
of  Christians  in  this  day  concerning  the  practices  of 
their  respective  Churches.  Will  anyone  say,  that  some 
hundreds  of  years  hence,  the  writings  of  the  Bishops 
and  other  ministers  of  Christian  Churches  must  not  be 
consulted,  when  trying  to  find  out  the  rites  and  religious 
services  of  the  respective  Churches  to  which  they  be- 
longed ?  If,  for  instance,  there  should  be  found  at  that 
time,  in  the  writings  of  the  ministers  of  the  Episcopal, 
Presbyterian,  Methodist  and  other  Churches,  accounts 
of  the  baptizing  of  young  children,  shall  it  be  objected, 
such  testimony  cannot  be  received  as  to  the   practice  of 

■^  On  this  point  a  living  author  remarks  as  follows : — "  Another  re- 
mark which  I  would  here  offer  is,  that  we  draw  a  wide  distinction  be- 
tween the  value  of  the  testimony  of  the  Fathers  as  to  doctrines  and 
the  oral  teaching  of  the  Apostles,  and  their  testimony  as  to  those 
matters  of  fact,  that  came  under  their  immediate  cognizance.  It  is 
important  to  keep  this  in  view,  because  the  value  of  human  testimony 
is  very  different  in  one  of  those  cases  to  what  it  is  in  the  other.  The 
value  of  a  man's  testimony  to  a  fact  that  takes  place  under  his  own 
eye,  or  to  a  matter  that  is  the  ol^ject  of  the  senses,  is  very  different  to 
that  of  his  report  of  an  oral  statement,  especially  with  respect  to  mat- 
ters of  doctrine." — Goode's  JJivinc  Hide  of  Faith  and  rraciice. 


PRELIMINAllIES.  21 

those  Churches  ?  No  one  will  say  this.  "Why  then  ob- 
ject to  the  testimony  of  the  same  kind  of  men  on  the 
same  subject  in  the  earlier  days  of  Christianity  ?  It 
cannot  be  done  by  consistent,  impartial  lovers  of  truth. 
When  such  writings  have  been  examined  and  believed  to 
be  genuine,*  and  are  received  as  testimony  on  other 
points,  we  must  receive  them  on  this  likewise.  And 
when  all  men  shall  be  brought  to  take  an  enlightened 
and  correct  view  of  this  question,  and  shall  search  after 
truth  from  a  love  of  it,  they  will  gladly  avail  themselves 
of  all  the  aid  that  such  testimony  affords.  They  will 
rightly  examine  also  the  principles  of  interpretation 
which  they  adopt,  and  omit  nothing  that  will  throw  light 
on  the  subject  of  their  inquiry.  And  thus  acting,  they 
will  bring  this  controversy  to  an  end,  and  admit  that  In- 
fant baptism  stands  on  a  firm  and  immovable  basis. 

6.  The  state  of  the  controversy — the  point  at  issue, 
and  nature  of  the  evidence,  being  now  considered,  let  us 
proceed  to  the  examination  of  the  question — '"/s  Infant 
Baptism  of  Divine  authority,  or  is  it  an  innovation 
brought  into  the  Church  since  the  death  of  the  Apostles  f 
In  conducting  this  investigation  it  must  be  remembered, 
we  are  not  to  bring  this  question  and  place  it  in  the 
midst  of  the  customs  and  institutions  of  our  own  age,  and 
examine  it  under  their  colorings  and  shadows,  but  trans- 
fer ourselves  in  imagination  to  the  Apostolic  age,  and 
there  in  the  midst  of  the  institutions,  customs,  etc.,  that 
surrounded    the    Apostles,    conduct    our    examination. 


""  Only  those  "vrritings,  and  portions  of  T^'ritings,  the  authenticity  of 
which,  have  borne  the  test  of  sound  criticism,  and  received  the  apjiro- 
val  of  schohirs,  will  be  introduced  as  authority  in  this  work. 


22  PRACTICE  OF  ALL  ANCIENT  CHURCHES.  [A.  D.  1S57— 

This  is  also  an  error  into  which  many  fall — They  ap- 
pear not  to  consider  that  we  are  some  1750  years  in 
advance  of  the  days  of  the  Apostles — that  the  usages, 
LAWS,  and  habits  of  this  age,  dijGfer  greatly  from  those 
of  that,  and  of  other  ages.  And  hence  in  looking  at  this 
question  through  the  medium  of  any  other  than  its  own 
age  and  institutions,  they  may  see  it  in  very  different 
colors  from  its  true  one. 

To  understand  precisely  the  meaning  of  any  writer, 
it  is  necessary  to  know  all  the  circumstances  that  affect- 
ed his  mind  at  the  time  he  wrote.  Therefore,  in  order 
to  understand  as  correctly  as  possible  the  meaning  of 
the  writings  of  the  Apostles,  we  should  endeavor  to  place 
ourselves  in  the  same  age,  amidst  the  same  customs,  sur- 
rounded by  the  same  circumstances,  and  read  as  a 
cotemporary  of  the  Apostles  would  read. 

7.  And  that  we  may  adhere  to  these  principles,  and 
particularly  to  the  one  last  mentioned,  we  will  take  up  the 
practice  of  baptizing  young  children,  as  we  find  it  now 
among  us,  and  trace  it  back  through  the  different  ages 
of  the  Church  up  to  the  days  of  the  Apostles,  to  ascer- 
tain when  it  commenced,  or  whether  there  is  any  period 
between  this  and  the  Apostolic  age,  when  it  was  not 
known  in  the  Church.  And  if  we  find  it  in  all  the  inter- 
vening ages,  we  will  then  take  up  the  Holy  Scriptures, 
and  having  made  ourselves  acquainted  (so  far  as  we  shall 
be  able)  with  the  laws,  customs,  and  influences  likely  to 
have  affected  the  Apostles,  examine  their  writings  on 
this  point — bearing  in  mind  those  influences  under  which 
they  wrote. 


-1130  A.  D.]  ORIGIN  OF  ANTIPEDOBAniSM.  23 

1.  Beginning  at  the  present  time  (the  middle  of  the 
nineteenth  century)  we  find  that  all  the  Ancient  Churches 
known  to  us,  The  G-reek  Cliurch,  Syrian  Churchy  Latin 
or  Roynan  Qhurch,  JVestorians,  Armenians,  Qopts,  Ahys- 
sinians  and  all  the  sects  of  Moiiophosytes,  baptize  In- 
fants. And  so  also  seven-eighths"  or  nine-tenths  of 
those  bearing  more  modern  names  (some  of  whom  claim 
to  have  descended  in  a  direct  line  from  the  Apostles) 
Protestant  Episcopalians,  Moravians,  Lutherans,  Pres- 
byterians, Congregationalists,  Methodists  and  numerous 
others,  all  baptize  Infants. 

2.  On  the  other  side,  the  Antipedobaptists*  form  a 
large  and  respectable  body  of  Christians,  and  are  found 
in  various  parts  of  the  relig:ous  world.  They  are  known 
in  history  by  several  different  names — "  Anabaptists — 
Menonites  or  Minnists, — Baptists,"  and  some  others. 
But  they  prefer  now,  with  few  exceptions,  the  name  of 
Baptists.  And  though  differing  among  themselves  on 
many  other  points,  are  united  in  their  opposition  to  the 
baptism  of  young  children — that  is,  are  all  Antipedo- 
baptists. 

And  however  respectable  in  numbers,  at  the  present 
time,  before  we  travel  back  more  than  three  centuries, 
they  dwindle  into  a  few  scattered  sects,  confined  chiefly 
to  Holland,  Upper  Germany,  and  countries  contiguous 
to  the  Alps. 

About  the  year  1636,  their  system  was  first  reduced 
into  consistency  and  moderation. f 

^  Antipedobai3tists — this  term  embraces  all  those  who  are  opposed 
particularly  to  the  baptism  of  children  (avti  against  rtatj,  Ttaibo^ 
child — /3artTts-cd — to  baptize. 

f  See  Mosheim — Encyclopedia  of  Religion?!  Kiiowlodop.  (a  Rnptist 
Avork.)     15nrk"s  Tlico.  Pid.  utid  cilicrs. 


24  INFANT  BAPTISM.  [A.  D.  ll.W— 

3.  Continuing  our  march  some  four  centuries  fartlier, 
we  come  to  the  period  when  their  principles  as  Antipe- 
dobaptists,  are  first  brought  to  light  in  the  history  of 
the  Church.  It  seems  that  one  Pierre  de  Bruys,  a 
native  of  Toulouse,  about  the  year  1110,  began  first 
to  preach  publicly  against  the  baptism  of  young  children 
—  denying  that  they  could  be  saved  !  He  continued  his 
career  some  twenty  years,  and  collected  a  considerable 
number  of  followers,  but  was  arrested  about  the  year 
1130,  by  the  Papal  authority,  burnt  to  death,  and  his 
followers  dispersed  !* 

On  this  point  we  shall  dwell  more  at  large  in  another 
place,  in  connection  with  the  history  of  the  Waldenses. 
It  is  only  necessary  to  glance  at  these  centuries  in  our 
march,  for  history  has  made  them  familiar  to  every 
reader.  No  one  doubts  the  fact  that  Infant  Baptism  was 
the  prevailing  practice  of  Christians  during  this  time, 
and  it  would  be  a  work  of  supererogation  to  swell  this 
volume  with  citations  of  the  proof. 

Passing  on  through  the  eleventh,  tentli,  and  ninth  cen- 
turies, we  find  it  uyiivcrsal —  practiced  everywhere,  and 
hy  all.  No  one  called  it  in  question  who  baptized  at 
all.  There  were  some  who  rejected  water  baptism  alto- 
gether— but  no  record  (yet  brought  to  light)  tells  of  any 
baptizing  sect  that  rejected  Infants.  Indeed,  nearly 
the  whole  Church,  in  those  countries  where  Christianity 
had  been  introduced  at  an  early  period,  was  composed 
of  members  baptized  in  their  infancy.  Adult  baptism 
was  comparatively  a  rare  thing  except  in  places  more  re- 
cently converted  to  tlie   Christian  faith,  and  in  those 

"■  Sop  Mnshcini — Waddington  find  Wall, 


—900  A  I).]  PRACTICE  OF  THE  CIlUUCIT.  25 

regions  where  missionaries  were  at  work.  In  all  the 
National  ChurcJies  Infant  Baptism  was  not  only  univer- 
sally practiced,  but  almost  the  only  baptism,  because 
family  baptism  had  been  handed  dow^n  from  past  gener- 
ations.* 

And  so  with  the  eighth,  seventh,  sixth,  avAffth  cen- 
turies, Infant  Baptism  had  no  one  to  oppose  it  except 
those  who  opposed  all  baptism.  Its  universality  is  vir- 
tually admitted  by  the  concession  of  Mr.  Tombs,  a  cele- 
brated Antipedobaptist  writer,  who  says,  ''  It  was  carried 
almost  ivithout  control,"  during  this  period.  And  Wall, 
objects  even  to  his  use  of  the  word  '^almost''  in  that 
place.  And  says  Tombs  '•  Puts  in  the  word  almost,  as  if 
some,  though  few,  did  oppose  it :  there  is  on  the  contrary, 
not  one  saying,  quotation  or  example  that  makes  against 
it,  produced  or  pretended,  but  what  has  been  clearly 
shown  to  be  a  mistake.  As  in  the  first  four  hundred 
years  (of  Christianity)  there  is  none  but  one  Tertullian, 
who  advised  it  to  be  delayed  till  the  age  of  reason  ;  and 
one  Nanzianzen  until  three  years  of  age,  in  case  of  no 
danger  of  death  :  So  in  the  folloAving  six  hundred  years 
there  is  no  account  or  report  of  any  one  man  that  op- 
posed it  at  all."t 

This  question  called  forth  great  research  and -much 
labor  about  the  close  of  the  seventeenth,  and  beginning 
of  the  eighteenth  centuries.  And  among  others  a  "  Mr. 
Danvers,  an  Antipedobaptist  writer  of  those  times,  found, 
as  he  supposed,  various  passages  in  the  writings  of 
authors  of  the  first  thousand  years  of  Christianity,  that 

^  See  "W.  Wall's  Histoiy  of  Baptism. 

t  History  of  Tnfnnt  Baptism,  Third  Edition,  vol  ii.  pao-e  212. 
o 


20  INFANT  baptise:.  [A.  ]■).  ]000— 

did  imply  opposition  to  Infant  Baptism,  but  Wills  and 
Baxter,  who  followed  him  on  the  other  side,  discovered 
and  exposed  his  many  mistakes  and  errors.  There 
wants  nothing  but  looking  into  the  books  themselves 
(continues  Wall)  to  see  they  are  nothing  to  the  purpose. 
Mr.  Dan  vers  created  to  Mr.  Wills  and  Mr.  Baxter  a  great 
deal  of  trouble  in  sending  them  from  one  book  to  another, 
to  discover  his  mistakes  and  misrepresentations  of  seve- 
ral authors  within  this -space  ;  but  withal  a  great  deal  of 
discredit  to  himself,  for  there  is  not  one  of  his  quota- 
tions that  seemed  material  enough  to  need  searching  but 
proved  to  be  such."*  (i.  e.  Mistakes  or  nothing  to  the 
purpose.) 

Since  the  time  of  these  writers,  the  opponents  of 
Infant  Baptism  have  almost  abandoned  the  field  of  his- 
torical evidence,  and  entrenched  themselves  within  their 
own  interpretation  of  the  Holy  Scriptures. 

They,  however,  have  written  Church  Histories,  and 
some  other  works,  into  which  these  same  errors  have 
been  introduced,  (it  may  be  without  a  knowledge  of 
their  true  character  and  previous  exposure)  to  which  we 
shall  recur,  and  particularly  to  a  passage  from  a 
defective  copy  of  the  work  of  the  venerable  Bede,  who 
wrote  in  the  eighth  century,  and  to  Jones'  History  of 
the  Christian  Church — so  called. 

Were  it  necessary,  volumes  of  proof,  specific  in  its 
character,  might  be  collected  from  the  authors  of  these 
centuries  testifying  to  the  fact  that  Infant  Baptism  was 
the  doctrine  and  practice  of  the  Church.  But  as  it  is 
admitted  by  high  authority  on  the  other  side,  that  "  It" 

"-•"   Hist.  T'lip..  vol.  ii.    ji;ioo  'Ji  •_>. 


-400  A.  D.]  PRACTICE  OF  THE  CHURCH.  27 

Vfas  carried  almost  beyond  control"  during  that  period 
—  and  we  shall  soon  show  that  it  was  universal  long 
before — and  it  being  our  ultimate  object  to  ascertain 
when  it  commenced,  we  might  pass  on  to  the  remaining 
four  centuries. 

But,  before  doing  so,  for  the  satisfaction  of  the  unin- 
formed reader,  we  will  show  what  was  the  faith  of  the 
Church  on  this  point  during  the  "Pelagian  controversy," 
which  agitated  the  Christian  world.  East  and  West, 
during  the  fifth  century.  The  cause  of  this  controversy 
was  the  denial  of  original  sin.  Pelagius  and  others 
contended  that  young  children  were  born  without  sin, 
and  in  the  same  state  which  Adam  was  before  his  fall.  The 
great  body  of  the  Church  on  the  other  side,  held  that 
all  of  Adam's  posterity  were  born  with  depraved  natures, 
and  the  inheritors  of  original  sin,  etc.  In  this  contro- 
versy Infant  Baptism  was  frequently  brought  up  to  dis- 
prove the  doctrine  of  the  Pelagians.  Wh}^,  it  was  asked, 
did  the  Church  baptize  Infants,  if  not  on  account  of 
^'  original  sin  ?     What  other  sin  had  they  ?" 

Pelagius  and  his  followers  were  also  charged  with 
undermining  and  making  useless  the  baptism  of  Infants 
by  their  doctrine,  but  tliis  they  denied.  Its  high  author- 
ity was  acknowledged  by  both  parties  ;  no  one  called 
that  in  question.  And  we  shall  see  in  the  course  of  our 
research  that  its  autlioritif  was  never  called  in  question 
during  the  first  thousand  years  of  Christianity  by  any 
one  that  admitted  water  baptism  at  all. 

For  the  two  individuals,  to  whom  reference  has  already 
been  made,  as  having  advised  its  dolay,  both  admitted 
its  necessity  in  danger  of  death.     One  advi.-:Gd  its  delay 


28  INFANT  BAPTISxM.  [A.  I).  4:30- 

iintil  three  years  of  age,  that  the  child  might  be  able  to 
answer  the  questions  for  itself,  instead  of  its  sponsors.''' 
The  other  having  embraced  the  doctrine  that  baptism 
"washed  away  all  past  sins,  advised  its  postponement  to 
a  period  in  life,  when  men  would  not  be  so  likely  to  sin 
after  their  baptism.  But  in  cases  of  danger,  even  lay- 
men must  baptize,  sooner  than  permit  any  to  go  w^ithout 
the  cleansing  of  the  sacrament. f 

Therefore  neither  of  them  called  in  question  the 
authority^  but  only  advised  in  certain  cases  the  delay  of 
Infant  Baptism.     But  more  of  this  in  its  proper  place. 

Let  us  return  to  the  Pelagian  controversy.  Augustine, 
a  man  of  great  power  and  learning,  holding  very  decided 
views  of  original  sin,  attacked  the  doctrines  of  Pelagius 
and  his  friend  Celestius,  w^ith  great  energy  and  success. 
He  unmasked  and  exposed  their  errors  in  every  phase 
in  which  they  could  be  presented ;  and  for  that  end,  the 
autliority  and  i?ractice  of  baptizing  little  cliildren  "were 
his  frequent  weapons. 

And  the  fact,  of  introducing  Infant  Baptism  to  dis- 
prove a  doctrine  that  so  deeply  affected  the  whole 
Church,  proves  not  only  its  practice,  but  its  liigli 
authority,  at  the  time.  This  is  confirmed  also  by  the 
consideration,  that  no  one  on  the  other  side  called  in 
question  its  validity.  The  Divine  authority  of  this  rite 
was  admitted  by  all ;  and  when  the  opposers  of  original 
sin  were  pressed  with  the  charge  of  making  useless  or 
undermining  Infant  Baptism,  they  gave  other  reasons 
than  original  sin,  as  the  ground  of  its  necessity. 

*  Oratio  De  Baptismo.     Greg.  Nan. 

f  TcrtuUianus  De  Baptismo.     Chapter  18. 


-417  A.  1).]  PKACTICE  OF  THE  CHUKCH.  29 

Instead  of  rejecting  Infant  Baptism  as  some  inferred 
from  his  doctrines,  Pelagius  declares,  as  we  shall  see, 
that  "  He  never  heard  of  even  an  impious  heretic  ^Yho 
would  avow  such  a  thing."  And  to  correct  the  many 
misrepresentations  in  circulation,  both  Pelagius  and 
Celestius  drew  up  articles  of  their  belief  and  sent  them 
to  the  Bishop  of  Rome. 

In  which  Pelagius,  when  he  comes  to  baptism,  says  : 

"We  hold  one  "baptism  which  wo  affirm  must  be  administered 
with  the  same  sacramental  words  to  infants  with  which  it  is  to 
elder  persons."* — Lieellus  FiDEi.f 

He  thus  acknowledges  his  faith  in  Infant  baptism, 
but  evades  the  doctrine  of  original  sin,  and  also  cuts  oif 
the  charge  of  two  baptisms,  by  saying — the  "  same  sac- 
ramental words"  are  to  be  used  in  all  cases. 

He  sent  likewise  with  his  "confession  of  faith"  an 
accompanying  letter,  parts  of  which  are  quoted  by 
Augustine,  in  order  to  make  his  animadversions  upon 
them.     In  one  place  Augustine  quotes  him,  saying — 

"  He  is  slandered  b}^  men,  as  if  he  denied  the  sacrament  of 
baptism  to  young  children,  and  did  promise  the  Kingdom  of 
Heaven  to  any,  without  the  redemption  of  Christ.''^ — Augustin 

DE  PeCCATO    OrIGINALE,  C.  17,  18,  ETC. 

After  some  remarks  on  this — Augustine  quotes  him 
as  next  saying, 


*  Apud  Augustin,  de  gratia  Christi,  c.  32. 

■f  Baptisma  unura  tenemus,  quod  iisdem  sacramenti  verbis  in  infan- 
tibus  quibus  etiam  in  majoribus  asserimus  esse  celebrandum. 

%  Se  ab  hominibus  infamari  quod  neget  parvulis  baptismatis  sacra- 
mentum,  et  absque  redemptione  Christi  abquibus  regna  coelorum 
promitat. 


30  INFANT  BAPTISM.  [A.  D.  417- 

"  He  never  heard  even  of  any  impious  heretic  -who  would  avow 
such  a  thing  in  regard  to  little  children — for  who  is  there  so  igno- 
rant of  Gospel  reading  (Evangelicse  lectionis)  that  he  would — 
not  to  say,  venure  to  affirm  this — but  even  in  a  heedless  way 
SAY,  or  indeed  think  such  a  thing.  In  a  word,  who  can  be  so 
impious  as  to  wish  little  children  not  to  be  sharers  in  the  King- 
dom of  Heaven,  and  so  forbid  them  to  be  baptized  and  regenerat- 
ed in  Christ/^" — Ibid. 

Again : — 

"Who  is  there  so  impious  as  to  interdict  the  common  redemp- 
tion of  mankind  to  any  age  whatever.^'! — -Ibid. 

Augustine,  commenting  on  these  passages  and  others 
of  like  import,  charges  Pelagius  with  evasions  and  ambi- 
guity. That  he  keeps  away  from  the  main  point  at 
issue.  That  the  question  was  not  whether  Infants 
ought  to  be  baptized,  but  if  they  have  no  original  sin, 
why  are  they  baptized  ?  And  when  did  they  sin  ?  Or, 
if  thoj  have  no  sin  at  all,  what  is  their  condition  before 
baptism  ?  and  so  on. 

Here  we  would  remark  that  we  have  nothing  to  do 
with  the  subjects  of  controversy  that  may  be  brought 
up  in  connection  with  the  question  before  us.  Our 
only  business  is  to  find  out,  at  each  successive  step, 
whether  Infant  baptism  is  still  the  practice  of  Chris- 
tians. 


*  Nunquam  se  vcl  impium  aliquem  Hereticivm  audisse,  qui  hoc 
quod  proposuit  de  parvulis,  diceret.  Quis  euim  ita  Evangelicae  lec- 
tionis ignarus  est,  qui  hoc  non  modo  affirmare  conetur,  sed  qui  vel 
leviter  diccre  aut  etiam  sentire  possit?  Deniquc  quis  tam  impius, 
qui  parvulos  cxortes  rcgni  coclorum  esse  velit,  dum  cos  baptizari  et  in 
Christo  renasci  vetat. 

f  Quis  ille  tam  impius  est,  qui  cujuslibet  aetatis  parvulo  intcrdicat 
communem  bumani  generis  redemptionem. 


-317A.  Aporf.]  PRACTICE  OF  THE  CHUIICII.  31 

Whatever  doctrines  may  be  advocated  or  opposed,  it 
forms  no  part  of  our  present  plan  to  defend  one  side 
or  the  other,  or  to  stop  to  show  that  Infant  baptism  is 
not  answerable  for  men's  fancies.  The  simple  ftict,  "Is 
Infant  baptism  the  practice  of  the  Church,  or  is  it  not?" 
is  all  with  which  we  are  now  concerned. 

Celestius,  in  his  confession  of  faitli  (Libellus  fidei)  is 
more  open  and  explicit  on  original  sin.     As  recited  by 

Augustine,  he  says  : — 

• 

"  We  acknowledge  that  Infants  ought  to  be  baptized  for  the 
remission  of  sins,  according  to  the  rule  of  the  Universal  Church, 
and  according  to  the  meaning  of  the  Gospel.  For  the  Lord  has 
ordained  that  the  kingdom  of  Heaven  is  not  to  be  conferred  on 
persons  unless  they  are  baptized,  (referring  to  St.  John,  iii.  5) 
which,  because  the  power  of  nature  cannot  give,  it  is  necessary  to 
confer  through  the  liberty  of  grace.  But  we  do  not  therefore  say 
that  Infants  are  to  be  baptized  for  the  remission  of  sins,  that  we 
may  seem  to  confirm  the  opinion  of  the  propagation  of  sin,  which 
is  a  thing  far  from  the  Catholic  sense.  For  sin  is  not  born  with' 
a  man  which  is  afterwards  committed  by  him.  Because  it  is  not 
the  fault  of  nature,  but  of  the  will,  as  may  be  demonstrated. 
It  is,  therefore,  proper  to  confess  the  former,  lest  we  seem  to  make 
divers  kinds  of  baptism  ;  and  also  necessary  to  guard  against  the 
latter,  lest  by  means  of  this  mystery,  it  be  to  the  reproach  of  the 
Creator  said,  that  sin  was  conveyed  through  nature  to  man  before 
it  was  acted  out  by  man.^'* — Augustin  de  Peccato  Origixall. 
c.  5. 

*  Infantes  autem  debcre  baptizari  remissionem  peccatorum  secun- 
dum regulam.  universalis  Ecclesiic,  et  secundum  Evangelii  senteutiam 
confitemur ;  quia  Domiiius  statuit  regnum  Coelorum  non  nisi  bap- 
tizatis  posse  conferri :  quod  quia  vires  naturas  uon  habent,  con- 
ferre  necesse  est  per  gratis  libertatem.  In  remissionem  autem  pec- 
catorum baptizandos  infantes  non  idcirco  diximus,  ut  peccatum  ex 
traduce  firmare  videamur  ;  quod  longe  a  Catholico  sensu  alienum  est. 
Quia  peccatum  non  cum  homine  nascitur,  quod  postmodum  exercitur 
ab  homine ;  Quia  non  natune  delictum,  sod  voluntatis   esse  demon- 


32  INFAx\T  BAPTISM.  [A.  D. -117- 

Iri  this  passage  Celestius  not  only  shows  that  he  did 
not  oppose  Infant  baptism,  but  tells  us  that  it  is  the 
"rule  of  the  universal  Church,"  and  doctrine  of  the 
Gospel  (Evangelii  sententiam.)  Pelagius  said  he  had 
never  heard  even  of  any  impious  heretic  who  denied 
it — (meaning  among  those  who  baptized  at  all) — and 
asks,  w^ho  is  so  ignorant  of  gospel  reading  (Evangelicse 
lectionis)  as  even  to  think  such  a  thing,  much  less  affirm 
it. 

The  testimony  of  these  two  men  is  the  more  impor- 
tant on  this  point,  because  of  the  great  advantages  they 
had  enjoyed  for  knowing  the  custom  of  the  Church  in 
different  parts  of  the  world.  They  were  born  and  bred, 
the  one  in  England  and  the  other  in  Ireland,  came  to 
Rome  early  in  the  fifth  century,  and  resided  there  till 
the  invasion  of  the  Goths,  410,  A.  D,  They  both  vrent 
thence  to  Carthage,  in  Africa,  at  which  place  Celestius 
remained  sometime,  and  attempted  to  gain  admittance 
as  a  Presbyter  into  the.  Church ;  but  being  disappoint- 
ed, afterwards  travelled  over  Greece  and  various  por- 
tions of  Asia,  visiting  all  the  most  noted  Eastern 
Churches  of  Europe  and  Asia.  Pelagius  went  direct  to 
Jerusalem  and  settled  there.* 

Both  of  these  men,  who  had  enjoyed  such  opportuni- 
ties of  knowing  by  personal  observation  the  practice  of 
all  the  most  noted  churches  in  Christendom,  sent  in  a 
written  declaration  of  their  faith  in  the  year  417,  A.  D., 

stratur.     Et  illud  ergo   confitcri   cougruum    ne   diversa  baptismatis 
genera  facerc  videamur :  et  hoc  pra?munirc ;  necessarium  est,  ne  per 
mysterii  occasionem,  ad  Creatoris  injuriam,  malum  auteqnam  fiat  ab 
homine  tradi  dicatur  homini  per  naturam. 
^^-  See  Wall's  History,  vol.  i.  p.  370. 


-317  A.  Apos.]  practice  of  THE  CHURCH.  38 

one  of  them  saying — "Infant  baptism  is  the  rule  of  the 
Universal  Church" — the  other  that  he  had  "never 
heard  of  even  any  heretic  (or  sectary)  that  denied  bap- 
tism to  Infants." 

The  following  year  a  council  was  held  at  Carthage, 
in  which  all  the  provinces  of  Africa  were  represented — 
214  Bishops  w^re  present,  and  eight  canons  passed 
an;ainst  the  Pelao;ian  tenets.  In  the  second  canon 
Infant  baptism  is  referred  to,  and  two  errors  con- 
demned— one  ao;ainst  the  doctrine  of  Pelao:ius  and 
Celestius  in  regard  to  original  sin — the  other  against 
the  opinion  of  some  who  thought  baptism  ought  not  to 
be  given  until  the  eighth  day  after  birth — the  time  of 
circumcision. 

That  which  regards  Infant  baptism,  is  as  follows  : 

"  Resolved  also,  that  Tvhosoever  denies  that  Infants  be  baptized 
fresh  from  their  mother's  womb,  or  says  that  they  are  indeed  bap- 
tized for  the  remission  of  sins,  but  yet  they  derive  no  original  sin 
from  Adam,  vrhich  is  expiated  by  the  laver  of  regeneration, 
(v^-hence  it  would  follows  that  in  them,  not  the  true  form  of  bap- 
th;m  for  the  remission  of  sins  is  understood,  but  a  false  one)  let 
him  bo  Anathema.  For  what  the  Apostle  says — *  by  one  man 
sin  entered  into  the  v\'^orld,  and  death  by  sin  ;  and  so  death  passed 
upon  all  men,  for  that  (or,  in  whom)  all  have  sinned,^  can  in  no 
otherwise  be  understood  but  in  the  way  the  Catholic'^'  Church  ex- 
tended everywhere  has  always  understood  it.  For  by  this  rule  of 
faith  also  the  little  ones,  who  cannot  as  yet  have  committed 
any  sin  in  themselves  are  truly  baptized  for  the  remission  of  sins, 
that  what  they  derj,ved  by  generation  may  be  cleansed  by  regen- 
eration."!— CoxciLii  Cartiiag.  Anxo  418  Caxon  Secuxdus. 

^  ''  Universal,"  not  "J?o?/2an"  Catholic. 

f  Item  placuit  ut  qui  cumque  parvalos  reccntes  ab  uteris  matrum 
baptizandos  ncgat ;  aut  dicit  in  remissionem  quidem  peccatorum  eos 


34  INFANT  BAPTISM.  [A.  Apos.  318- 

Let  it  be  remembered  that  we  have  nothing  to  do  for 
the  present,  with  any  opinions  as  to  the  effects  of  bap- 
tism or  other  notions  advanced  in  regard  to  it.  Our 
simple  inquiry  is,  Does  the  Church  at  this  time  practice 
infant  baptism  ?  And  I  suppose  this  canon,  passed  in  a 
council  where  all  the  provinces  of  Africa  were  represent- 
ed, will  satisfy  any  mind  as  to  the  practice  of  the  Church 
throughout  Africa. 

It  may  be  proper  to  remark  here,  that  some  writers, 
meeting  with  this  canon,  and  not  examining  the  circum- 
stances under  which  it  was  passed,  have  inferred  that 
Infant  baptism  was  not  established  fully  in  the  Church 
till  about  this  time.  Whereas,  the  authority  of  Infant 
baptism  is  taken  for  granted,  and  the  canon  passed  to 
meet  the  Pelagian  doctrine  of  original  sin,  and  the  cus- 
tom of  some  others,  who  put  off  baptism  till  the  eighth 
day  after  birth  ;  the  same  day  on  which  circumcision 
was  performed.  This  same  thing  was  a  subject  of  legis- 
lation at  Carthage  some  hundred  and  fifty  years  before 
this,  as  we  shall  show  hereafter. 

This  canon  has  also  been  quoted  by  certain  Antipedo- 
baptist  writers  as  passed  in  a  council  at  Milevium,  416, 
A.  D.  But  it  will  be  found  on  examination,  that  a  sy- 
nodical  letter  contains  all  that  was   determined   on  this 

Ijaptizari,  scd  nihil  ex  Adam  trahcre  originalis  peccati  quod  lavacro 
regenerationis  expietur  (unde  sit  consequens  ut  in  eis  forma  baptis- 
matis  in  remissionem  peccatorum  non  vera  sed  falsa  intclligatur) 
Anathema  sit.  Quoniam  non  aliter  intelligendum  est,  quod  ait  Apos- 
tolus, Per  unum  hominem  peccatum  intravit  in  raumdum  ct  per  pec- 
catum  mors,  et  ita  in  omnes  homines  pertransit,  in  quo  omnes  pecca- 
verunt :  Nisi  quemadmodum  Ecclesia  Catholica  ubique  diffusa  semper 
intollexit.  Propter  banc  enim  regulam  fidei,  etiam  parvuli,  qui  nihil 
peccatorum  in  seipsis  adhuc  commmitterc  potuerunt,  ideo  in  pecca- 
torum remissionem  veraciter  baptizantur,  ut  in  eis  regeneratione 
mundetur  quod  regeneratione  traxerant. 


-316  A.  Apos.]  practice  of  the  CHURCH.  35 

point  at  that  time,  whicli  was  sent  to  Innocent,  bishop  of 
Rome,  soliciting  his  aid  in  putting  a  stop  to"  the  Pelagian 
heresy.  The  account  of  which  is,  so  far  as  baptism  is 
concerned,  that  a  new  sect  had  sprung  up,  of  men  that 
were  enemies  to  the  grace  of  Christ,  making  useless  or 
undermining  Infant  baptism."^"  This  was  written  before 
the  last  works  of  Pelagius  had  reached  Numidia,  and 
the  inference  they  had  thus  deduced,  was  drawn  from  the 
doctrine  simply  that  '^  chikh-en  neiv  horn  ivere  in  the 
same  state  that  Adam  was  before  the  fall"  Hence  they 
inferred  that  those  who  held  such  views  must  think  that 
children  did  not  stand  in  need  of  baptism  or  anything 
else  to  entitle  them  to  salvation.  And  some  of  the  dis- 
ciples of  the  new  doctrine,  although  they  baptized  their 
children  and  claimed  for  so  doing,  Divine  authority,  had 
already  ventured  the  opinion,  which  was  new  and  strange 
in  that  age,  that  though  children  should  happen  to  miss 
of  baptism,  it  would  not  aifect  their  salvation. 

This  letter  not  only  takes  for  granted  the  practice 
and  necessity  of  Infant  baptism,  but  condemns  every  one 
whose  doctrines  shall  in  any  way  seem  to  contravene  it. 

In  the  same  year  a  council  at  Carthage,  where  Celes- 
tius  had  been  condemned  four  years  before,  sent  a  synod- 
ical  letter  to  the  Bishop  of  Rome  to  the  same  effect,  but 
couched  in  stronger  language,  calling  upon  him  to  unite 
in  anathematizing  all  whose  doctrines  made  it  a  matter 
of  indifference  as  to  the  salvation  of  children  whether 
they  were  baptized  or  not. 

This  council  has  also  been  referred  to,  to  show  that 

■•^  Synodical  letter  of  Milevium  Council,  to  Innocent  (27)  Apml 
Ano-nstiniiin.  E))i?;t.  52. 


36  INFANT  BAPTISM.  [A.  Apoh.  316- 

Infant  baptism  was  not  fully  established  in  the  Church 
till  about  this  time.  But  every  reader  will  find,  on  ex- 
amination, that  it  was  written  with  the  express  view^  of 
arresting  the  doctrines  of  Pelagius  and  Celestius — that 
they  are  even  called  by  name,  and  that  the  writer  goes 
on  to  say  that  ''  though  they  oivn  that  Infants  have 
REDEMPTION  BY  THE  BAPTISM  OF^  Cheist,  yet  many  of 
them  who  are  called  their  disci2)les,  advocate  doctrines 
which  overthrow  the  Christia7i  faitliJ'"^^  Infant  baptism 
is  taken  for  granted  as  the  imiversal,  well  known  and 
acknowledged  practice  of  the  Church,  and  the  object  of 
the  Epistle  is  to  solicit  the  co-operation  of  Innocent  in 
suppressing  the  difi'erent  opinions  assigned  by  this  new 
sect — and  to  confine  them  to  what  had  been  heretofore 
the  doctrine  of  the  Church — namely :  the  removing  of 
them  from  under  the  condemnation  consequent  on  the 
fall  of  Adam,  and  bringing  them  into  a  state  of  sal- 
vation under  Christ.  Or  transferring  them  from  the 
first,  to  the  covenant  of  the  second  Adam. 

As  to  the  prevalence  of  Infant  baptism  at  this  time 
more  than  a  hundred  proofs  might  be  adduced  in  con- 
nection with  the  Pelagian  controversy  alone.  And  in 
every  case  find  it  referred  to  as  a  thing  well  known, 
universal,  and  its  authority  never  questioned.  But  when 
a  Council  of  214  Bishops  pronounces  an  Anathema  on 
any  who  shall  deny  original  sin,  and  "  that  Infants  are 
hai^tized  that  ivhat  they  derived  hy  generation,  may  he 
cleansed  hy  regeneratiori  " — and  Pelagius,  a  Briton,  who 
had  lived  in  Home,  then  in  Carthage,  and  settled  finally 
in  Jerusalem,  tells  us  he  had  ''never  heard  of  even  a] 

■"-   Wall,  vol.  i.  p.  333. 


-316A.  apo?.]         practice  of  the  church.  37 

heretic  {or  sectary)  that  denied  baptism  to  Infants^ — and 
Celestius  who  had  travelled  West  and  East,  and  visited 
the  most  noted  Churches  in  Europe  and  Asia,  prodaims 
it  to  be  the  "  universal  rule  of  the  Church  to  baptize  In- 
fants,'' &c.  What  need  we  more  ?  To  add  other  testi- 
mony to  prove  the  practice  of  Infant  baptism  in  the 
Church  at  this  time,  would  be  offering  an  insult  to  the 
intelligence  of  the  reader. 

We   pass  on  to  a  period  before  the  Pelagian  contro- 
versy arose. 


CHAPTER  II. 


HISTORICAL    TESTIMONY   CONTINUED. 

Testimony  of  Council  of  Carthage — Aurelius — Donatists — Chrysostom — 
Baptism,  Christian  Circumcision — Original  sin— Benefits  of  Baptism — 
Jerome — Augustine  —  Ambrose— Optatus  —  Nazianzen- — Basil — Council 
of  Eliberis — Council  of  Carthage,  66  Bishops  present,  CjqDrian  presiding — 
TertuUian.  ^ 

About  the  year  400  or  300  from  the  Apostolic  age,  a 
question  was  proposed  in  a  Council  at  Carthage,  which 
shows  the  prevalence  of  Infant  baptism  at  that  time.  It 
was  the  case  of  certain  persons  carried  away  captive  in 
their  infancy  into  barbarian  countries,  who  after  a  lapse 
of  years  had  been  found  and  ransomed  by  their  friends. 
But.  when  brought  back  none  of  their  relatives,  then  alive, 
were  able  to  testify  whether  or  not  they  had  been  bap- 
tized before  they  were  carried  away.  They  being  in- 
fants when  their  parents  were  captured,  w^ere  of  course 
too  young  to  remember  anything  about  it,  and  their 
friends  were  in  doubt  what  to  do.  They  would  by  no 
means  have  so  important  a  thing  neglected,  and  yet 
they  were  afraid  of  desecrating  the  ordinance  by  re-bap- 
tism. The  case  was  laid  before  a  council  at  Carthage, 
and  the  following  is  its  decision  : 

"  It  is  resolved  concerning  Infants,  that  whenever  positive  wit- 
nesses cannot  be  found,  who  will  testify  that  they  have  been  bnp- 


-300A.APO3.]  INFANT  BAPTISM.  39 

tized  -without  doubt ;  and  they,  by  reason  of  their  age,  are  not 
able  to  answer  as  to  the  administration  of  the  saAament  to  them, 
that  they  be  baptized  without  any  scruple  •  lest  that  scruple  do 
cause  them  to  go  without  the  benefit- of  the  sacrament.  For  our 
brethren  sent  from  the  Mauritanians,  have  asked  our  advice  in 
council  on  this  point."*  "Who  ransom  many  such  from  the 
barbarians,"  &c.— coxcilii  carthaginiensis  quinti,  canon  6. 

This  not  only  shows  that  they  practiced  Infant  bap- 
tism, but  that  it  was  so  diligently  observed,  that  they 
hesitated  to  baptize  a  person  who  had  been  carried  away 
in  early  infancy,  fearing  they  would  be  guilty  of  re-bap- 
tism ;  so  great  was  the  probability  that  such,  however 
young  when  carried  away,  were  previously  baptized. 

Three  years  before  this,  a  question  was  discussed  at 
the  same  place  in  regard  to  the  promotion  of  persons  to 
offices  in  the  Church,  who  had  once  belonged  to  heretical 
sects,  which  incidentally  testifies  to  the  prevailing  cus- 
tom of  Infant  baptism,     Aurelius,  the  Bishop,  remarks  : 

"  In  a  former  council  it  was  resolved,  you  remember,  that  they 
who  were  baptized  in  their  infancy  among  the  Donatists  before 
they  were  able  to  understand  the  mischief  of  that  error,  and  when 
afterward  they  had  come  to  the  age  of  understanding, — the  truth 
being  acknowledged  by  them,  &c.  .  .  .  they  were  received 
by  us.  .  .  .  such,  without  doubt,  ought  to  bo  promoted  to 
Church  oflSces,  especially  in  times  of  so  great  need,  as  all  must 
concede. 

"  Some  of  the  teachers  of  the  same  sect,  would  come  over  with 
their  congregations,  if  they  might  continue  in  their  offices  [with 

^  Placuit  de  infantibus  quoties  non  invenhintur  certissmi  testes  qui 
eos  baptizatos  esse  sine  dubitatione  testentur,  neque  ipsi  sunt  per  ffita- 
tum  idonei  de  traditis  sibi  sacramentis  respondere  ;  absque  ullo  scru- 
pulo  eos  esse  baptizandos.  Ne  ista  trepidatio  eos  faciat  sacramento- 
runv  purgatione  privari.     Hiuc  enim  legati  Maurorum  fratres   nostri 


40  INFANT  BAPTISM.  [A.  Apos.  SOO- 

their  honors]  among  us.  But  this  I  leave  to  the  further  consider- 
ation of  the  brethren,  only  that  they  consent  to  our  determination 
in  admitting  these  to  orders.* — codex  canonum  ECCLEsiyE  Afri- 
cans, CANON  57. 

Infant  baptism  is  here  mentioned  as  a  thing  common 
and  well  known,  and  the  points  at  issue,  are,  whether 
those  baptized  among  the  Donatists  in  infancy  are  not 
less  to  blame  than  those  received  among  them  at  adult 
age  ?  And  whether  such  ought  to  be  debarred  from 
holding  offices  in  the  Church,  if  they  return  to  it,  as  soon 
as  they  come  to  years  of  discretion?  The  following  re- 
solution had  been  before  passed  in  regard  to  this  subject 
in  an  assembly  at  Carthage  rf 

"  In  reference  to  the  Donatists,  resolved  that  we  consult  our 
l)rethren  and  fellow  Bishops,  Siricius  and  Simplicianus,  concern- 
ing only  those  who  are  baptized  in  infancy,  among  them — that 
when  they  have  been  converted  to  the  Church  by  the  wholesome 
purpose  of  God,  whether  that  which  they  have  not  done  by  their 
own  judgment,  but  was  the  error  of  their  parents,  shall  hinder 
them,  that  they  shall  not  be  promoted  to  Ministers  of  the  holy 
altar  V — concil.  cartuag.  tertii  can.  48. 

*  Superior!  consilio  Statutum  esse  mecum  recognoscit  unanimitas 
vestrti  ut  hi  qui  apud  Donatistas  parvuli  baptizati  sunt  nondum  scire 
valentis  en  oris  eorum  interitiim,  et  posteaquam  ad  aetatera  rationis 
capacem  perveneriiiit,  agnita  veritate,  &c. — recepti  sunt-  sine  dubio 
ad  otiicium  clericatus  tales  esse  appHcandos,  et  maxune  in  tantarerura 
necessitate  nullus  est  qui  non  concedat. 

Quanquam  nonnulli  ejusdcm  sectae  clerici  cum  plebibus  atque 
honoribus  suis  ad  nos  transirc  desiderent,  &c. — Sed  Loc  mnjori  fratruni 
supradictorum  consideratioui  dimittendum  ccnsco. — Tantiun  do  his 
qui  Iiifiintes  baptizati  sunt  satagimus,  ut  mostraj  si  phvcet,  in  iisdeni 
ordinandis  consentiat  voluntati,  &c.       » 

f  De  Donatistis,  placuit  ut  consulamus  fratres  et  consacerdotes  nos- 
tros  Siricium  et  Simplicianum.  de  solis  infantibus  qui  baptizantur 
penes  eosdem,  ne  [leg.  an.]  quod  sue  non  fecerunt  judicio,  cum  ad 
Ecclesiam  Dei  salubri  projjosito  fucrint  conversi,  parentum  illos  error 
impediat,  ne  provetiantur  sacri  altaris  ministri. 


— 2S0  A.  Apos.]  practice  of  the  CHURCH.  41 

From  this  resolution  and  the  words  of  Aurelius,  wef 
see  that  the  Donatists,   a   schismatical  sect,  baptized 
young  children  as  well  as  the  great  body  of  the  Church, 
and  yet  some  Baptist  writers  tell  us  that  they  themselves 
are  descendants  of  the  Donatists  ! 

We  need  nothing  plainer  or  more  satisfactory — as  it 
regards  the  Church  of  Carthage  at  this  time.  Let  us 
pass  on  some  twenty  years  nearer  the  Apostles  and  see 
what  was  the  practice  in  other  places  ? 

John  Chrysostom  was  a  native  of  Antioch,  called 
the  "golden  mouthed"  on  account  of  his  eloquence — 
was  a  voluminous  writer,*  and  finally  made  patriarch  of 
Constantinople.  In  one  of  his  homilies  on  Genesis,  he 
speaks  of  the  pain  and  suflfering  of  circumcision,  and  the 
advantages  of  baptism  over  it  in  the  following  manner : 

"But  our  circumcision,  I  mean  the  grace  of  baptism,  gives 
cure  without  pain,  and  procures  for  us  a  thousand  benefits,  and 
fills  us  with  the  grace  of  the  Spirit.  And  it  has  no  determinate 
time  as  that  had  ;  but  it  is  lawful  to  any  one  in  the  very  begin- 
ning OF  HIS  AGE,  or  in  the  middle  of  it,  or  in  old  age,  to  receive  this 
circumcision  made  without  hands.  In  which  there  is  no  trouble  to 
be  undergone — but  to  throw  off  the  load  of  sins  and  receive  pardon 
for  all  foregoing offences.^'t — hom.40in  genesin.edit.  savil.  tomI. 

*  TVe  quote  only  from  those  books  that  are  generally  acknowledg- 
ed to  be  genuine,  or  such  portions  as  are  received  by  Protestants  and 
Romanists. 

tx^t'  "tr^v  latpstav  xai  fxvpioiv  ayaOutv  ripo^tvfo^  yivEtac  v^fttVy  xai  -tr^^ 
'tov  Hvivy.a'toi  yji-iai  f^rttrtXj^jt  ;^apt'T'oj.  Kat  ovde  apK^jxevov  sxt^v  ;t;atpoi/ 
xa9oTt$p  Extt,  aXX*  e^snro  xai  'f v  acopj^  t^lxlo.  xav  zv  /xbctj,  xac  sv  avfoi 
rco  yvi(ia  ytvoixevov  Tfcva,  Tfavfrjv  Sffas^at  tyjv  axst'portoitjtov  rifpito^viv 
tv  vi  ovx  eSfL  Ttovov  rtpo{xs(.vac,,  aT^K  'ajxaptrjfiatuv  ^opi'ta  aHoOitat,  xac 
tuiv  £v  riavtc  ;^poi'c<3  rC7iyijj,jxe7^i^jxatuv  vyx^^pyjcst'V  svps9a,(>» 

4* 


42  INFANT  BAPTISM.  [A.  Apos.  280- 

Chrysostom  here  calls  baptism  the  Christian's  circum- 
cision, and  says  that  it  is  confined  to  no  particular  age 
as  was  circumcision.  Instead  of  the  8th  day  after 
birth,  we  may  receive  it  in  the  very  beginning  of  age 
(fvacop?^  Tjuxia'^  or  in  the  middle  of  it,  or  in  old  age. 
Meaning  at  any  time  when  in  the  providence  of  God  the 
sacrament  can  be  administered. 

That  he  means  by  ''the  beginning  of  life,"  the  first 
stages  of  infancy,  is  obvious  both  from  the  sense,  and 
from  his  use  of  the  same  phrase  in  another  place  con- 
cerning circumcision,  where  he  says,  ''  circumcision  was 
appointed  on  the  8th  day,  because  the  cutting  off  the 
flesh  is  more  easily  borne  '  in  the  beginning  of  age.'  " 
(iv  acop'/j  r^KLxia)  i.  e.  when  very  young,  the  infant  is  not 
so  sensible  of  the  pain. 

In  another  of  his  homilies,  he  condemns  a  heathenish 
and  superstitious  practice  of  some  mothers  in  rubbing  a 
certain  kind  of  mud  on  the  forehead  of  a  newly  born 
child  to  keep  it  from  being  bewitched.  And  asks  them 
how  they  can  bring  such  children  to  the  priest  to  be 
baptized.     His  words  are  : 

"  He  that  annoints  an  infant  so  with  mud,  how  can  he  think  but 
that  he  makes  it  abominable?  How  can  he  bring  it  to  the 
priest?  Tell  me,  how  can  you  think  it  is  fitting  for  the  minister 
to  make  the  sign  on  its  forehead,  when  you  have  besmeared  it 
with  that  mud."*— IIoM.  12,  in  1  Epist.  ad  Corinthios. 

*   O    BopGopCO  ;^piCOl'  7tCL.$    OVXf'    XO.l    '^hiT.VXtOV  TtOtft   -to  7i0.lhlQV  ;     7tu)5 

-yap  avto  ripocjaysc  tai^  X^-?^^  '^ov  tfpiwj :  siris  jxov  rtwj  a|iots  ertc  rov 
fAetutriov  d^payiba  tTiifite^yivai,  Ttapa  ti^i  z'ov  rCptspvtspa  ;^£tpoj  fv^a 
tw  BopSopov  trisxpisO'i' 


-2S0  A.  apo3.]        practice  of  the  church.  43 

By  the  ''  sign,"  he  refers  to  the  sign  of  the  cross  then 
made  on  the  forehead  in  baptism,  and  seems  to  think 
that  the  child  is  rendered  almost  unfit  to  receive  bap- 
tism, and  to  have  that  sign  made  on  the  same  place 
which  had  been  defiled  by  such  a  superstitious  rite. 

Again,  Julian  and  Augustine  both  quote  him,  where 
he  is  speaking  of  the  benefits  of  baptism ;  Julian,  who 
was  opposed  to  the  doctrine  of  original  sin,  to  show  that 
he  did  not  enumerate  "forgiveness  of  sins"  among  the 
blessings  received  in  baptism — hence  he  could  not  have 
believed  in  original  sin :  Augustine,  to  show  that  this 
same  passage  may  be  reconciled  with  the  doctrine  of 
original  sin.    The  sentence  on  which  the  question  turned 

was  this Ata  tovto  xai  T'a  Tiatbia,  'BarttL^ofxev  xaotot,  afiaptiri.iyjfa 

ixrj  Exnvifa.  "  For  this  also  we  baptize  children  although 
they  have  not  any  sins."  Julian  had  translated  it  to  this 
effect :  "  For  this  cause  we  baptize  children  also,  although 
they  are  not  defiled  with  sin." 

Auofustine  makes  a  distinction  between  the  "defile- 

o 

ment  of  original  sin,"  and  the  expression  "not  having 
any  sins" — i.  e.  personal  sins  of  their  own.  He  has  the 
whole  passage  relating  to  the  benefits  of  baptism  written 
out  in  the  original  Greek,  and  also  Julian's  translation 
of  it,  with  his  own  corrections,  according  to  Wall,  who 
gives  it  as  follows  : 

"  Blessed  be  God,  who  onl}^  does  wonders,  who  has  created  and 
ordered  all  things  :  Lo  !  they  do  enjoy  the  serenity  of  freedom, 
who  but  even  now  were  held  in  captivity.  They  are  become  citi- 
zens of  the  Church,  who  were  in  a  vagabond  state  of  aliens. 
And  they  are  entered  into  the  lot  of  the  righteous,  who  were  under 
the  confusion  of  sin.  For  they  are  not  only  free,  but  saints  ;  nor 
saints  only,  but  justified  ;  and  not  only  justified  but  sons  ;  and 
not  only  sons,  but  heirs  ;  not  heirs  only,  but  brothers  of  Christ ; 


44  INFANT  BAPTISM.  [A.  Apos.  278- 

not  only  his  brethren,  but  co-heirs  ;  not  co-heirs  only,  but  mem- 
bers of  him  ;  not  members  only,  but  his  temple ;  and  not  his 
temple  only,  but  organs  of  his  Spirit.  You  see  how  many  are 
the  benefits  of  Baptism.  And  yet  some  think  that  the  heavenly 
grace  consists  only  in  the  forgiveness  of  sins  ;  but  I  have  reck- 
\  oned  up  ten  advantages  of  it.     For  this  cause  we  baptize  infants 

also,  tliougli  they  are  not  defiled  with  sin,"^  that  there  may  be 
superadded  to  them  saintship,  righteousness,  adoption,  inheri- 
tance, a  brotherhood  with  Christ,  and  to  be  made  members  of 
him."t — St.  Austin.  Lib.  1.  Contra  Julianum. 

We  should  perhaps  be  puzzled  to  distinguish  between 
all  the  benefits  enumerated  bj  this  ancient  orator ;  but 
he  leaves  us  in  no  doubt  as  to  the  practice  of  infant  bap- 
tism, which  is  our  only  business  for  the  present. 

AYe  pass  next  over  to  Rome,  (a  place  of  resort  at  that 
time  from  every  part  of  the  world)  to  see  whether  this 
practice  prevailed  there  also. 

Jerome,  who  was  educated  at  Rome,  and  now  residing 
there  again,  after  having  spent  some  years  in  Syria,  is 
highly  esteemed  and  much  courted  for  his  literary 
attainments.  In  writing  to  a  lady  of  great  distinction, 
and  endeavoring  to  impress  on  her  mind  her  responsi- 
bility in  training  up  her  young  daughter,  tells  her  that 
the  sins  of  children  are  laid  to  the  charge  of  the  parents 
till  they  arrive  at  the  age  of  discretion.  And  specifies 
among  others  the  neglect  of  their  baptism  as  a  sin  of 
the  parent,  and  not  of  the  child.  Supposing  her  to 
object  in  the  language  of  Ezekiel — '^  The  sins  of  the 
father  are  not  imputed  to  the  children,  nor  those  of  the 
children  to  the  father,  but  the  soul  that  sinneth,  it  shall 
die" — he  answers  : 

*  Austin's  correction  is,  "  have  not  any  sins,"  of  their  own. 
f  Wall's  History,  vol.  1.  p.  167,  3d  edition. 


-278  A.  Apos.]  practice  OF  THE  CHURCH.  45 

"  This  is  said  of  those  that  are  a])le  to  understand  ;  of  such  as 
he  was,  of  whom  it  is  written  in  the  gospel,  '  lie  is  of  age,  let  him 
speak  fur  himself.'  But  he  that  is  a  child,  and  thinks  as  a  child, 
(until  he  come  to  years  of  discretion,  and  the  letter  Y  of  Pythago- 
ras brings  him  to  the  place  where  the  road  parts  into  two)  his 
good  deeds  as  well  as  his  evil  deeds  are  imputed  to  his  parent. 

"  Unless  you  suppose  the  children  of  Christians,  if  they  do  not 
receive  baptism  are  themselves  accountable  for  the  sin.  And  the 
wickedness  not  imputed  to  those  who  would  not  give  it  to  them, 
particularly  at  the  time  they  ought  to  receive  it,  and  could  not 
have  made  any  opposition  to  receiving  it,"  &c.* — IIierom.  Epist. 

AD  LeTAM  DE  LVSTITUTIONE  FiLIAE  EpiST.  7. 

Here  again  we  see  Infant  bfiptism  spoken  of  as  the 
practice  of  Christians,  and  in  a  w^aj  that  declares  it  to 
be  a  sin  in  parents  to  neglect  it.  But  that  which  is 
most  important  to  our  purpose  is,  that  it  is  incidentally 
referred  to,  not  brought  up  as  a  question  of  doubt.  And 
we  wish  the  reader  to  observe  that  in  all  the  places  in 
which  it  has  yet  been  introduced,  it  was  brought  in  for 
the  purpose  of  sustaining,  or  illustrating  in  some  way, 
other  questions  at  issue.  And  it  will  be  further  seen 
that  Infant  baptism  itself  never  was  called  in  question 
during  the  earlier  ages  of  Christianity.  Whenever 
referred  to,  its  Divine  authority  is  always  taken  for 
granted. 

We  have  now  seen  that  before  the  rise  of  the  Pela- 
gian controversy  as  well  as  after  it,  that  Infant  baptism 

*  Hoc  de  his  dicitur  qui  possnnt  sapere,  de  quihus  in  Evangelio 
scriptum  est;  aetatera  habet,  loquatur  pro  se.  Qui  autem  parvulus 
est  et  sapit  ut  parvulus,  donee  ad  annos  sapientiie  veniat,  et  Pytha- 
gorse  litera  Y  eum  perducat  ad  biviura ;  tam  bona  ejus  quam  mala 
parentibus  imputantur.  Nisi  forte  existimas  Christianorum  filios,  si 
baptisma  non  receperint,  ipsos  tantum  reos  esse  peccati;  et  non  etiam 
scelus  referri  ad  eos  qui  dare  noluerint ;  maxinnu  eo  tempore  quo 
coutradicere  non  potuerant  qui  accepturi  erant. 


46  INFANT  BAPTISM.  [A.  Apos.  288.- 

was  the  practice  of  the  Church  in  each  of  the  then 
known  quarters  of  the  globe.  But  as  it  has  been 
alleged  that  Augustine,  never  alluded  to  Infant  baptism 
till  after  the  rise  of  the  Pelagian  controversy,  we  will  cite 
one  more  passage  from  him,  written  in  the  earlier  part 
of  his  life,  and  not  far  from  the  time  we  are  now  con- 
sidering. And  we  do  so  for  the  twofold  object  of  show- 
ing, both  the  universality  of  the  practice,  and  his  opinion 
as  to  its  Divine  authority. 

The  DoNATiSTS  were  a  body  of  Christians  that  had 
separated  from  the  Church  Catholic,  in  consequence  of 
certain  objections  to  Cecilianus,  who  was  made  bishop 
of  Carthage  in  the  year  211  after  the  Apostles.  They 
objected  to  Cecilianus  both  on  account  of  his  own  former 
conduct,  and  on  account  of  the  life  of  one  of  his  Con- 
secrators.  They  called  themselves  the  true  Church,  and 
required  all  that  had  been  baptized  in  the  Church  under 
Cecilianus,  when  they  came  over  to  them,. to  be  re-bap- 
tized, on  the  ground  that  a  Church  that  permitted  such 
an  officer  to  perform  its  functions  was  corrupt  and  in 
error,  arid  its  ordinances  therefore  invalid.  Augustine 
made  issue  with  them  on  this  point,  and  took  the  posi- 
tion that  error  in  the  head  or  heart  of  an  officer,  did  not 
annul  the  authority  of  his  office.  That  the  validity  of 
baptism  was  not  destroyed  by  error  of  the  life,  or  judg- 
ment of  the  administrator  while  acting  under  proper 
authority.  Nor  even  in  the  case  of  a  person  receiving 
baptism,  would  error  in  judgment,  or  the  want  of  the 
right  faith,  necessarily  make  void  his  baptism.  In  de- 
fence of  this  position,  he  adduced  the  practice  of  the 
Church  in  giving  baptism  to  young  children,  who  could 


-288  A.  Apos.]  practice  OF  THE  CHURCH.  4T 

not    as   yet    exercise    faith.      The    following    are   his 
■words : 

"  Which  (sentiment)  the  universal  Church  holds  as  handed 
down  to  them,  when  little  Infants  are  baptized.  Who  certainly 
cannot  yet  believe  with  the  heart  unto  righteousness  or  confess 
with  the  mouth  unto  salvation  as  the  thief  could  :  [who  by  ne- 
cessity was  saved  without  baptism]  nay  by  their  crying  and 
noise  while  the  sacrament  is  administered  to  them,  they  hinder 
from  being  heard  the  mystical  words.     And  yet  no  christian 

WILL  SAY  THEY  ARE  BAPTIZED  TO  NO  PURPOSE. 

"And  if  any  one  should  seek  Divire  authority  in  this  thing  ; 
although  that  which  the  universal  Church  hohls,  and  not  in- 
stituted BY  councils,  but  WAS  EVER  IN  USE  and  most  rightly  be- 
lieved to  be  handed  down  by  none  other  than  Apostolic  author- 
ity; nevertheless,  we  can  make  a  probable  estimate  of  what^the 
sacrament  of  baptism  avails  to  young  children,  by  the  circum- 
cision  of  the  flesh,    which   God's  former  people   received."* — 

AUGUST.  DE  BAPTISMO  CONTRA  DONATISTAS,  LIB.  4. 

After  this  he  goes  on  to  show  the  similarity  between 
circumcision  and  baptism.  But  we  have  enough  for  our 
present  purpose.  The  most  learned  man  of  ancient 
times  here  informs  us  that  Infant  baptism  is  a  doctrine 
held  by  the    Universal  Church,   and  not  instituted   by 


*  Quod  traditum  tenet  universitas  ecclesiae  cum  parvuli  infantes 
baptizantur  ;  qui  certe  nondum  possuut  corde  credere  ad  justitiam 
et  ore  confiteri  ad  saluteni,  quod  latro  potuit :  Quiuetian  flendo 
et  vagiendo  cum  in  eis  Mysterium  celebratur,  ipsis  mysticis  vocibus 
obstrepunt.  Et  tamen  nullus  Christianorum  dixerit  eos  inaniter 
baptizari. 

Et  si  quisquam  in  hac  re  Divinam  antoriatem  qucerat ;  Quan- 
quam  quod  univei'sa  tenet  Ecclesia,  nea  Conciliis  institutum  sed 
semper  retentum  est,  non  nisi  autoritate  apostolica  traditum  rectis- 
sime  creditur  ;  Tamen  veraciter  conjieere  possumus  quid  valeat  in 
parvulis  baptismi  Sacrameutum  ex  circurndgione  carnis  quamprior 
populus  accepit.  ' 


48  INFANT  BAPTISM.  [A.  Apos.  2S8.- 

Councils,  but  ordained  by  notliing  less,   as  all  believed, 
than  tlie  authority  of  the  Apostles. 

We  next  visit  the  Church  in  Mih\n  in  -which  we  find 
Ambrose  the  bishop  commenting  on  the  Abrahamic 
covenant.  He  also  institutes  a  comparison  between  the 
rites  of  circumcision  and  baptism,  and  remarks  : 

"  As  circumcision  is  from  inf^mcy  so  is  the  disease.  No  time 
ought  to  be  void  of  the  remedy  because  none  is  void  of  guiU."* 
He  then  apphes  it  to  baptism  and  reads,  "  No  person  comes  to 
the  kingdom  of  heaven  but  by  the  sacrament  of  baptism. "f 

And  cites  the  words  of  our  Saviour  to  Nicodemus 
with  the  annexed  comment — John  iii.  5  : 

"  For  unless  any  one  be  born  again  of  the  water,  and  of  the 
Holy  Spirit,  he  cannot  enter  into  the  kingdom  of  God.  You  see 
he  excepts  no  pers(jn,  no  not  an  infant  not  one  that  is  hindered 
by  any  unavoidable  accident.  And  even  if  such  (as  are  hindered) 
have  freedom  from  punishment.  I  know  not  that  they  shall  have 
the  honor  of  the  Kingdom. "J  Ambrosius  de  Abra.  Patr.  lib.  2. 
c.ll. 

He  regarded  it  not  only  as  generally  necessary  to 
every  one,  young  or  old,  or  as  a  law  which  all  are  bound 
to  obey — but  would  not  take  on  himself  the  responsi- 
bility of  saying,  that  even  those  who  missed  of  baptism 
by  accident  or  by  no  fault  of  their  own,  would  certainly 
have  the  lionor  of  Heavtn,  although  they  might  escape 
any  positive  punishment. 

We  liave  no  time  to  discuss  the  extreme  nature  of  his 

*  Ambrosius  de  Abra.  Patriarch,  lib.  2.  c.  11. 

•j-  i.  e.  no  other  prescribed  mode. 

\  Nisi  enini  quis  renatus  fu^rit  ex  cqua  et  Spiritu  Snncto,  non 
potest  introire  in  regnum  Dei.  lltique  nullum  cxcipit :  Non  infantem, 
non  aliqua  prevcntufi8"  necessitate.  Habeiint  tamcn  ilkin  opertam 
penaruui  iniinunitateni,  niseio  an  habeant  regni  bonorem. 


—260  A.  Apos.]  practice  of  THE  CHURCH.  49 

views,  but  more  unequivocal  testimony  to  tlie  doctrine 
of  Infant  baptism  in  the  Church  of  Milan  at  that  time 
could  not  be  given. 

Passing  on  thirty  years  nearer  to  the  Apostles,  we 
come  to  the  time  that  ,, Op tjitiL%  -bishop  of  Milevium 
wrote.  In  comparing  the  Christian's  putting  on  Christ 
in  baptism,  to  the  j)utting  on  of  a  garment,  he  says : 

"  But  lest  any  one  should  say  I  speak  irreverently  in  calling 
Christ  a  garment,  let  him  read  what  the  Apostle  says;  'As  many 
of  you  as  have  been  baptized  into  Christ  have  put  on  Christ' 
Oh  what  a  garment  is  this,  that  is  always  one  and  innumerable, 
that  decently  fits  all  ages  and  all  shapes!  It  is  neither  too  big  j 
for  IxFAXTS  nor  too  little  for  men,  and  without  any  alteration,  / 
fits  women/'* — lib.  v.  de  schismate  doxatistarum.  ^-^ 

This  is  too  plain  to  need  comment.  The  garment  of 
baptism  "  fits  all  ages  and  all  shapes,  not  too  big  for 
Infants  or  too  little  for  men,'' 

Let  us  turn  next  to  Gregory  Nazianzen  who  wrote 
about  the  same  time  with  Optatus,  but  in  a  different 
part  of  the  world,  was  born  in  Cappadocia  and  educated 
in  Athens.  In  reference  to  baptism,  he  often  uses  the 
term  ''  Laver  of  regeneration'' — '^  the  seal,"  the  ^^ grace," 
the  ^'  anointing"  to  be  ^'•sanctified"  kc.  Finding  that 
there  were  those  among  his  hearers  who  were  almost 
persuaded  to  be  Christians,  but  who  then,  as  is  too  often 
the  case  now,  could  not  make  up  their  minds  fully  to 
unite  themselves  with  the  Church — some  of  them  having 

■^  Sed  ne  quis  dicat,  temere  a  me  Filiiim  Dei  vestem  esse  dictuam 
legat  Apostolum  dicentem;  Quotquot  in  nomine  Christi  baptizti: 
estis,  Christum  induistis.  0  tunica  semper  una  et  innumerabilis 
quaj  decenter  vestiat  et  omnes  setates  et  formas :  nee  infantibus 
rugatur  nee  in  juvenibus  tenditur,  nee  in  foeminis  mntatur. 

5 


60  I^^FANT  BAPTISM.  tA.  Apos.  260- 

been  catecliumens  for  a  long  time,  (i.  e.  receiving  a 
course  of  instruction  to  prepare  them  for  baptism)  yet 
delayed  to  come  for^vardj  he  admonishes  them,  that 
Satan  ''Sets  on  all  ages  and  must  be  resisted  hy  all. 
Art  tJiou  a  youth  I  fight  against  pleasures  and  passions 
ivith  this  auxiliary  strength;  enlist  thyself  in  God's 
army.  .  .  .  Art  thou  old?  let  thy  gray  hairs  strengthen 
thee:  strengthen  thy  old  age  ivith  baptism.'' 

"  Have  you  an  Infant?  Let  not  wickedness  have  the  advan- 
tage of  time:  from  his  infancy  let  him  he  sanctified;  from  the 
ctadle  let  him  be  consecrated  by  the  Spirit.  You  fear  the  seal 
on  account  of  the  weakness  of  nature  :  how  faint-hearted  a  mo- 
ther and  of  little  faith.  Iltinnah,  even  before  Samuel  was  born, 
promised  him  to  God,  and  consecrated  him  immediately  after  his 
birth  and  brought  him  up  in  the  priestly  dress,  not  fearing  any 
human  infirmity,  but  trusting  to  God.'^^f — oratio  de  baptismo, 
40. 

Nazianzen  here  urges  that  no  time  be  lost— that  In- 
fants be  *' sanctified"  and  receive  the  "seal"  (baptism) 
from  the  cradle,  and  rebukes  faint-hearted  mothers  who 
sometimes  delay  the  baptism  of  their  children  on  account 
of  their  weakness — pointing  them  to  Hannah's  faith. 

But  afterwards,  when  on  a  different  subject,  he  recom- 

*  Tlic  error  that  Grotius  fell  into  in  this  passage  has  been  so  often 
exposed  that  it  is  unnecessary  to  refer  to  it  here. 

f|  ovvx^^v  vadii^o-'^ritu)  -fco  nrfv^uaru     2d  6f5oixaj  tr^v  cr^paySa  bia  to 

Ttptv  ri  yivv>]9'yjvai,  tov  Sa^otjyX  xa^vvrtipxito  •fw  ©£(o  scat  yivvr^Qi:Vta 
iipov  ev^vi  Ttoiti,  xav  'tiq  tfpaf  tx>^  j'-foT.'/^  Gvva.viBp'ti'^iv^  ov  to  avd^f-^Tiivov 
^oSrjOeLOa,  tio  6i  ©£«  rtvc^tivaaaa' 


—260  A.  Apos.]  practice  OF  THE  CHURCH.  51 

mends  three  years  as  a  suitable  time  where  weakness  or 
disease  did  not  endanger  the  life  of  the  child.  When 
this  was  the  case,  however,  he  would  allow  no  time  to 
elapse  before  baptism.  Otherwise,  he  thought  it  might 
be  deferred  till  they  could  speak  distinctly  enough  to 
answer  the  questions  themselves,  in  the  baptismal  ser* 
vice.  But  either  case  admits  the  principle  involved  in 
the  question  of  Infant  baptism,  and  shows  that  this  was 
the  then  usage  of  the  Church.  In  the  latter  case  he 
was  reproving  certain  candidates  for  baptism,  who  seem- 
ed more  concerned  in  making  outward  preparation  than 
inward — telling  them  that  a  preparation  of  heart  and  an 
earnest  desire  for  it,  was  the  acceptable  thing  to  God — ' 
but  lest  some  might  suppose  that  what  he  had  said  con- 
flicted with  an  established  doctrine  of  the  Church,  he 
adds : 

"  Some  may  say,  suppose  this  to  hold  in  the  case  of  those  who"^ 
can  DESIRE  baptism  ;  what  say  you  as  concerning  those  who  are 
as  yet  Infants,  and  are  not  sensible  of  its  loss  or  of  its  ^race, 
shall  we  baptize  them  too?  By  all  means,  if  any  danger  make 
it  requisite.  For  it  is  better  that  they  be  sanctified  (baptized) 
without  their  own  sense  of  it,  than  that  they  shoukl  die  unsealed 
and  UNINITIATED.  And  a  ground  of  this  to  us  is  circumcision,  which 
was  given  on  the  eighth  day,  and  was  a  typical  seal,  and  was 
practiced  on  those  who  had  no  reason.  As  also,  the  anointing  of 
the  door  posts,  which  preserved  the  first  born  by  things  which  had 
no  sense.  As  for  others,  I  gave  my  opinion,  that  they  should  stay 
three  years  or  thereabouts,  when  they  are  capable  to  hear  and 
answer  some  of  the  holy  words:  and  though  they  do  not  perfect- 
ly understand  them,  yet  they  form  them  ;  and  that  you  then  seem 
to  sanctify  them  in  soul  and  body  with  the  great  sacrament  of  in- 
itiation."*— Oratio  de  Baptismo,  40. 

'  Eatco  'tavta,  ^rjist  rtfpt  t'coj/  STiili^fovvTfoiv  to  jSajtifis/xa  ti  5'  av  £t,7ioi$ 


52  INFANT  BAPTISM.  [A.  Apos.  26'0— 

It  will  perhaps  surprise  some  of  onr  readers  to  hear 
that  this  passage  "was  ever  referred  to  in  behalf  of  Anti- 
pedobaptism.  Nothing  can  be  more  manifest  than  its 
recognition  of  the  doctrine  of  Infant  baptism.  Every 
one  who  thinks  at  all,  must  know  that  three  years  of 
age  is  not  the  ''age  of  discretion,''  which  is  the  lowest 
limit  that  Antipedobaptism  will  allow.  Gregory  himself 
says,  they  cannot  understand  the  meaning  of  the  words, 
but  yet  they  will  be  able  then  to  pronounce  some  of  them, 
and  gives  it  merely  as  his  own  "  ojnnion,"  (not  the  doc- 
trine of  the  Church,)  that  in  such  cases  it  will  be  well  to 
delay  it  until  about  that  time.  As  to  his  opinion,  or  the 
reason  he  gives  for  it,  few  we  presume,  will  be  disposed 
to  give  them  much  weight.  His  longest  limit  admits  the 
principle  of  Infant  baptism,  much  more  his  answer  in 
regard  to  the  weak  and  sickly. 

So  much  for  one  of  the  ''  ttvo,  who  advised  the  delay 
of  Infant  baptism  during  the  first  four  hundred  years 
of  Christianity."  We  shall  come  to  the  other  presently. 
But  who  would  dream  that  anything  against  its  authority 
could  be  found  in  these  passages  ?  Who  does  not  see 
that  both  its  practice  and  authority  are  clearly  implied — 
even  its  necessity  urged  in  cases  of  bodily  weakness  ? 

71  xai,  tavta  ^cxrit t6o^iv  ;  jiavvyi,  f  trtf  p  rt$  f  rtaty?;  xivhwo^  ICpstutov  -yap 
avai^Yjtoji  ayLa^7]i'0.i,  r^  arti%9eiv  aa^paytita,  xac  attXsnxa.  Kat  rorfoo; 
Jtoyoj  Tifxiv  7]  oxtayjixipoi  rifpftofiri,  TfvrCixTj  f  t$  ovaa  o^pay^s*  xai,  aXoytj- 
toii  I'd  7ipoiayo/x£V7i,  «$  5t  xat  tj  tU)V  ^%icov  xpt^t^  5ta  fcov  avai^ritoiv 
^%attovsa  ta  rtpototoxa.  Uepi  6f  t'wv  aTJKuv  8i8<^fiat  yvu^ixr^v,  tr^v 
tpwtiav  ava^fvoi/'T'aj,  t]  fiixpov  evto^  iovtov,  r^rtsp  ifovfovj  r^vixa  xae 
axov6ai,  rt  /xvoixov  xat  artoxpivs^ai  8vvavtai,  ft  xai  fxr^  avvuvra  TfXftwj 
aXT.   ovv  TfvTtov/xeva,  ovtio^  aytaffij/  ;iat  '^v^o-i  xat  6io[xo.ta  tw  ^tya^iai 


-260  A.  Apos.]  practice  op  the  CHURCH.  b6 

It  is  not  our  business  to  attempt  to  reconcile  his  in- 
consistency apparent  or  real,  when  at  one  time  he  ex- 
horts persons  procrastinating  duty,  to  avail  themselves 
of  this  "  auxiliary  strength,"  and  not  to  permit  "  wick- 
edness to  have  the  advantage  of  time  with  their  chil- 
dren, but  consecrate  and  seal  them  from  the  cradle;" 
and  at  another,  advises  delay  until  "  three  years  of 
age,  unless  danger  make  it  requisite."  It  is,  however, 
not  unusual  for  men  in  the  warmth  of  feeling  to  push  a 
favorite  theory  too  far,  and  then  stretch  other  principles 
beyond  their  lawful  bounds  to  harmonize  with  it.  Gre- 
gory was  very  justly  reproving  those  who  were  more 
anxious  to  have  one  high  in  office  to  baptize  them,  and 
to  avoid  the  poor  and  have  the  rich  their  fellow-recipients, 
at  the  same  time,  &c.,  than  they  were  about  their  own  fit- 
ness for  the  ordinance ;  and  hence  admonished  them  that  a 
due  preparation  of  heart — a  right  spirit — a  ^^  heart  in- 
flamed ivitli  the  desire  for  it,'' — were  things  more  import- 
ant than  all  external  pre-requisites  and  appendages. 
But  in  attempting  to  apply,  what  was  true  of  all  capa- 
ble of  desiring  it,  and  needing  such  preparation,  to  little 
children  who  did  not  need  it,  and  were  incapable  of  the 
"inflamed  desire;"  he  proposes  to  defer  baptism  in  their 
case  to  a  time  when  they  might  at  least  seem  to  desire 
it,  by  pronouncing  the  words  expressive  of  the  feeling; 
in  order  that  the  same  principle  should  cover  all,  instead 
of  making  the  proper  distinction  between  the  two  classes, 
as  had  always  been  done.  But  who  followed  his  advice? 
And  what  is  his  reply  to  the  simple  question — "  Shall 
Infants  be  baptized,  too?"  Answer — "  Zes,  hy  all 
means  if  danger  make  it  requisite.     For  it  is  letter  that 

5* 


54  INFANT  BAPTISM.  [A.  Apos.  260- 

tliey  he  sanctified  witJiout  their  own  sense  of  it,  than  that 
they  should  die  unsealed  and  uninitiated.  Aiid  a  ground 
of  this  to  us  is  circumcision,''  &c.     Thus  teaching  that 
baptism  supersedes  circumcision.     Shall  we  number  this  ^ 
man  as  an  opposer  of  Infant  baptism  ?    We  trow  not. 

In  connection  with  this  we  will  notice  another  writer  of 
this  age,  whose  testimony  has  been  brought  forward  to 
produce  the  impression  that  Infant  baptism  was  not  the 
universal  practice  of  the  Church  at  this  time  ;  and  then 
pass  on  to  that  which  is  more  explicit  on  the  subject. 

Basil,  a  cotemporary  of  Gregory  Nazianzen,  and 
Bishop  of  Ccesarea,  in  an  exhortation  to  catechumens, 
uses  language  w^hich  seems  to  imply,  as  some  think,  that 
young  children  were  not  baptized  by  him.  He  reminds 
some  of  his  auditors  that  "they  had  been  catechised  from 
childhood,  and  still  put  off  their  baptism."  This  is 
brought  forward,  as  if  proof  positive  that  Infant  bap- 
tism was  not  then  universal.  But  every  one  at  all  fami- 
liar with  Church  history  knows,  that  as  early  as  the 
close  of  the  second  century,  so  great  was  the  influx  of 
uninformed  persons  into  the  Church,  that  it  was  found 
necessary  to  adopt  measures  by  which  applicants  for 
baptism  should  be  instructed.  Pouring  into  it,  from 
every  class,  and  of  different  nations,  and  bringing  with 
them,  as  we  may  suppose,  every  variety  of  opinion; 
many  of  them  knowing  but  little  more  of  the  doctrines 
of  Christianity  than  the  great  truths  of  Christ's  death 
and  resurrection  ;  it  was  expedient  that  all  such  should 
be  more  thoroughly  instructed  before  they  were  admitted 
to  baptism.  And  for  this  purpose,  they  were  first  form- 
ed into  classes  and  taught  by  questions  and  answers; 
afterwards  schools  and  teachers  in  different  places  were 


—260  A.  Apos.]  practice  of  the  CIIUE.CH.  55 

provided  for  them.  Thej  who  chose,  brought  also  their 
children  with  them  to  these  schools.  (At  that  time,  only 
the  children  of  baptized  persons  were  baptized,  except 
such  as  were  adopted  by  Christians,  or  for  whom  Chris- 
tians stood  as  sureties  for  their  thorough  religious  train- 
ing.) iVnd  this  system  soon  suggested  the  idea  to 
pious  parents  of  availing  themselves  of  a  similar  method 
for  the  instruction  of  their  baptized  children.  And  by- 
and-by,  classes  of  these  Y>-ere  likewise  formed. 

It  appears  that  some  of  those  who  had  entered  the 
catechetical  school  under  Basil,  had  become  careless  and 
lukewarm  in  regard  to  their'  baptism  and  put  it  off  till 
they  had  now  grown  old,  some  of  their  children  had 
grown  up  to  manhood,  w^ho  were  brought  with  them  when 
very  young.  These  were  not  baptized  during  their  mi- 
nority, because  their  parents  themselves  were  not,  and 
now  they  were  old  enough  to  receive  the  ordinance  on 
their  own  responsibility,  they  were  following  the  example 
of  their  parents  in  imtting  it  off.  Basil,  in  a  public  ad- 
dress, thus  speaks  to  this  latter  class  of  persons : 

"  Do  you  procrastinate,  and  deliberate,  and  put  it  off?  Haying 
been  catechised  from  a  little  child  in  the  word,  have  you  not  yet 
learned  the  truth?  Always  hearing  it,  and  not  yet  come  to  the 
knowledge  of  it.  A  trier  all  your  life  long ;  a  considerer  till  you 
are  old?  When  will  you  become  a  Christian  ?  "When  shall  we 
see  you  become  one  of  us  ?'^* — oratio  exhortatoria  ad  baptis- 

MUM. 

*  "  Oxrf tj  xai  ^mfkvv^  xat  5ta,uf7.?.Etj  ;  ix  vt^fiov  'tov  "Koyov  xatrixov- 
fxivoi  ovrtw  avvtOov  fr^  a?tjj9f ta  ;  rtavtots  [xav^avuv  orSfrtco  r^x^ei  Ttpoi 
tfjv  e7iiyviC)6Lv ;  7t£tpa6tr^i  6ia  /3tor,  xaiaozoTto^  f-'-^XP''  y^P^i'y  TiotTf 
ytvr^'^Yi  ;^ptff'r't.ai'Oj  rtof  a  yj'copcijco^afv  Of  (d$  Tj'^ufri'poz',     &c. 


56  INFANT  BAPTISM.  [A.  Apos.  260- 

This  passage  has  been  often  brought  forward,  and  as 
much  noise  made  about  it,  as  if  of  itself,  a  demonstra- 
tion against  Infant  baptism  in  that  age,  because  Basil 
tells  some  of  his  auditors  that  they  had  been  "cate- 
chised from  a  child."  But  where  is  the  proof  that  these 
catechumens  were  born  of  Christian  parents  ?  There  is 
none.  What  is  it  worth  then,  so  long  as  we  know  that  the 
children  of  heathens  were  received  into  these  schools, 
with  their  parents,  and  continued  as  catechumens  or  candi- 
dates for  baptism,  some  of  them  for  many  years.  If  it 
could  be  shown  in  a  single  case  that  the  infant  children  of 
Christians  were  made  catechumens  of  such  schools  before 
their  baptism,  then  this  passage  could  only  make  it  a 
question  of  doubt,  whether  he  was  addressing  those  born 
of  Christian  parents  or  those  of  heathen  ?  But  since 
there  is  nothing  in  the  passage  itself  to  show  this,  and 
no  one  has  yet  adduced  any  other  proof  to  that  effect, 
every  one  must  perceive  that  this  passage  has  no  bear- 
ing whatever  on  the  question. 

We  might  dwell  longer  upon  it,  but  as  testimony 
already  adduced  has  proved  the  prevalence  of  Infant 
baptism  at  this  time,  and  there  is  abundance  of  evidence, 
which  cannot  be  questioned,  of  its  prevalence  before  this 
time,  further  remark  is  unnecessary.  There  is  a  pas- 
sage from  Basil  himself,  which  shows  what  was  his 
opinion  as  to  the  propriety  of  Infant  baptism.  Referring 
to  Solomon's  words,  that  there  is  a  "  time  for  every- 
thing," he  adds : 

"There  is,  therefore,  tlic  proper  season  for  several  things — a 
time  peculiar  for  sleep,  and  one  peculiar  for  watching,  a  time  for 


-260  A.  Apos.]  practice  OF  THE  CHURCH.  57 

war,  and  a  time  for  peace.     But  the  whole  life  of  one  (or  of  any 
one's  life)  is  proper  for  haptism."*t — Basil  Oratio  Exhortato- 

RIA  AD  BaPTISMUJI. 

Passing  on  to  a  Council  of  Eliberis,  held  a  little  more 
than  200  years  from  the  age  of  the  Apostles,  we  find  a 

*  There  is  aiiutlier  psissage  of  Basil's — also  one  from  Jerome — that 
are  sometimes  introduced  into  this  controversy.  But  they  are  not 
deemed  of  sufficient  importance  to  be  given  a  place  in  the  body  of 
this  evidence.  A  mere  glance  at  their  import  will  show  that  they 
have  no  beai-ing  on  the  question  before  us.  The  passage  of  Basil 
referred  to,  was  introduced  in  an  argument  with  the  EunomianSj_  who 
denied  the  Divinity  of  the  Son  and  Holy  Ghost.  He  argued  that  in 
thus  acting  they  renounced  their  baptism — for  that  was  in  the  name 
of  all  three  persons  in  the  Trinity,  hence  into  the  faith  of  the  Divinity 
of  each.  And  as  the  faith  into  which  they  were  baptized  is  prior  to 
the  act  of  baptism,  a  renunciation  of  that  foith  was  a  renunciation  of 
their  baptism.  This  is  the  substance  of  the  passage  and  argument. 
But  what  pedobaptist,  if  he  should  choose  to  adopt  the  same  kind  of 
reasoning,  might  not  say  the  same  thing  ?  That  all  rightl}^  baptized 
are  baptized  into  the  faith  of  the  Trinity — that  ah  adult  must  believe 
and  be  baptized  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost 
— Infants  are  baptized  likewise  in  the  same  faith,  and  taught  to  be- 
lieve, and  brought  up  in  the  same  doctrine.  In  baptism,  as  it  was  in 
circumcision,  faith  is  prior  in  the  purport  of  the  design,  but  not  in 
the  execution  of  the  artist — not  necessarily  prior  in  point  of  time  in 
its  application  to  its  subjects.  Nor  does  Basil  mean  anything  more 
than  this,  as  is  evident  both  from  the  passage  and  nature  of  the  argu- 
ment which  he  used. 

In  the  case  of  Jerome,  he  was  commenting  on  the  commission  ''  to 
teach  and  baptize  all  nations,"  in  which  he  shows  the  necessity  of 
instructing  nations  before  we  baptize  them.  To  which  every  pedo- 
baptist will  agree,  and  according  to  which  every  one  acts.  "Whenever 
sent  to  a  heathen  land,  no  one  ever  dreams  of  baptizing  before  he 
has  convinced  the  people  of  the  truth  of  his  message,  and  instructed 
them  to  some  extent  in  the  great  principles  of  Christianity.  But  as 
soon  as  this  is  done,  and  parents  who  have  children  believe,  and  are 
baptized,  he  also  baptizes  their  young  children.  Just  as  we  believe 
the  Apostles  acted  under  the  same  commission.  Jerome,  as  has  been 
already  seen,  expressly  declares  it  to  be  a  sin  in  parents  to  neglect 
the  baptism  of  their  children.  It  is,  therefore,  loss  of  time  to  dwell 
on  this  passage. 

"I"   Katpoj  [.isv  ovv  u.7Jkoi.i,   aW.oj    STiitr^SiLo^  16105  ^vrCvov,  xac  t§toj 

ypr^yopr^aeoii,  *t6to$  rCo7^i,uov  xat  't§i,o$   tLpr^vr^^'     Katpoj  8s  /3artT'tcf,uaT'os 


1 


58  INFANT  BAPTISM.  [A.  Apos.  205- 

canon  passed,  containing  regulations  in  regard  to  schism, 
and  the  conditions  on  which  those  who  had  been  guilty 
of  that  sin,  should  be  received  back  into  the  church 
when  application  was  made  by  them. 

''  If  any  one  go  over  from  the  Church  Catholic  to  any  heresy 
(or  sect)  and  again  return  to  tlie  Church  :  Resolved,  that  repent- 
ance be  not  denied  to  such  an  one,  inasmuch  as  he  has  acknow- 
ledged his  fault.  Let  him  be  in  a  state  of  repentance  for  ten 
years,  and  after  ten  years  be  admitted  to  the  communion. 

"  But  if  they  were  Infants  when  they  were  carried  over,  iuas- 
mucfi  as  it  was  not  their  own  fault  that  they  erred,  they  ought  to 
be  admitted  without  delay. ^^^'' — Concil.  Eliberitanum.  Can.  22. 

From  this  we  learn  again  that  infants  were  made 
members  of  schismatical  sects,  as  well  as  of  the  Church 
Catholic,  or  great  body  of  Christians.  This  canon  was 
passed  on  account  of  schism,  and  the  conditions  made 
in  regard  to  such  as  had  gone  over  from  the  Church,  or 
carried  over,  (transducti,)  which  implies  that  all  such 
were  members  of  the  Church  before  they  were  carried 
over.  And  the  manner  in  which  infants  are  referred 
to,  very  clearly  shows  what  was  the  common  practice  of 
the  age. 

Fifty  years  still  nearer  to  the  Apostles,  we  find  an- 
other Council  was  held  at  Carthage.  And  among  the 
questions  brought  before  that  body  for  their  deliberation, 
was  one  which  brings  out  very  explicitly  the  practice  of 
the  Church,  and  the  opinion  of  the  Council  in  regard  to 

^'  Si  quis  de  Catholica,  Ecclosia  ad  hercsim  transitum  fecerit,  rurs- 
usque  ad  ecclesiam  recurrent:  placuit  hie  penitentiam  non  esse  dene- 
gandam,  eb  quod  cognoverit  peccatum  suum :  qui  etiam  decem  annis 
agat  penitentiam  ;  cui  post  decem  annos  prrestari  communio  debet. 
Si  vero  infantes  fuorint  transducti ;  quod  non  suo  vitio  peccaverint, 
incunctanter  recipi  debent. 


-205A.  apos.]        practice  of  the  church.  59 

Infant  baptism.  The  question  proposed  was,  wlietlier  it 
would  not  be  better  to  delay  the  baptism  of  infants  till 
the  eighth  day  after  their  birth,  than  to  continue  baptiz- 
ing them  so  young  as  two  and  three  days  of  age,  as  was 
at  that  time  the  custom  ?  It  was  then  likewise  usual  to 
give  the  "hoW  kiss"  to  all  who  were  baptized.  Fidus, 
who  sent  up  the  proposition  to  the  Council,  gives  among 
other  reasons  for  its  delay  till  the  eighth  day,  that  this 
was  the  time  when  circumcision  was  administered,  and 
that  it  would  be  more  pleasant  to  give  them  the  holy  kiss 
at  that  age,  than  when  only  two  or  three  days  old.  His 
proposed  change  and  reasons  being  considered,  a  synod- 
ical  letter  was  written  in  reply  to  him,  of  which  the  fol- 
lowing arc  extracts  : 

"  Cyprian  and  others  of  the  College  of  Bishops  who  were  pre- 
sent, sixty-six  in  number,  to  Fidus,  our  brother,  greeting : 

''We  read  your  letter,  most  dear  brother,  &c 

So  far  as  it  pertains  to  the  case  of  Infants,  Avho  you  think  ought 
not  to  be  baptized  within  the  second  or  third  day  from  their  birth  : 
and  that  the  ancient  law  of  circumcision  should  be  observed,  so 
that  none  should  be  baptized  and  sanctified  before  the  eighth  day 
after  birth ;  it  seemed  to  all  in  our  Council  far  otherwise.  For 
as  for  what  you  proposed  to  be  done,  there  was  not  one  of  your 
opinion.  But  on  the  contrary,  it  was  our  unanimous  decision 
that  the  grace  and  mercy  of  God  should  not  be  denied  to  any 
one  as  soon  as  born.  .  .  .  And  whereas,  you  say  that  an 
infant  in  the  first  days  after  its  birth  is  unclean,  so  that  one  dis- 
likes to  kiss  it ;  we  think  not  thus,  nor  that  it  ought  to  be  any 
impediment  to  giving  it  the  heavenly  grace."* — Cypr.  Ep.  59  ad 

FiDUM. 

*  "  Legimus  literas  tuas,  frater  carissime,  &c.  .  .  .  Quantum 
vero  ad  causam  infantium  pertinet,  quos  dixisti  intra  secundum  vel 
tertium  dierrf|  quo  nati  sunt,  constitutos  baptizari  non  oportere  et  con- 


60  INFANT  BAPTISM.  [A.  Apos.  luO- 

There  are  several  things  for  tlie  reader  to  observe  iu 
this  place. 

First,  That  this  testimony  is  like  all  the  other  hereto- 
fore given,  incidental.  The  right  of  infants  to  baptism 
is  taken  for  granted,  and  a  secondary  question  implying 
its  previoas  existence  discussed;  the  mere  appendage  of 
a  few  days  delay. 

Secondly,  That  the  reasons  assigned  for  its  delay  till 
the  eighth  day,  instead  of  affecting  its  divine  authority, 
were  offered,  because,  in  the  first  place,  circumcision 
was  given  formerly  on  the  eighth  day,  and  because,  in 
the  second,  when  children  w^ere  so  young  it  was  unpleas- 
ant to  give  them  the  holy  kiss,  which  w^as  the  common 
practice  of  this  age. 

And  thirdly,  That  we  have  now  arrived  within  about 
one  hundred  and  fifty  years  of  the  Apostolic  age,  and 
may  presume  that  most  of  these  bishops  living  so  near 
that  age  had  abundant  means  of  ascertaining  whether 
this  thing  was  of  divine  authority  or  not.  And  further, 
that  of  so  large  a  number  as  sixty-six,  it  is  not  unreason- 
able to  suppose  that  some  of  them  were  old  men,  whose 
memories  would  carry  them  back  half  the  intervening  time, 
and  only  leave  them  some  sixty  or  seventy  years  to  trace 
it  to  the  Apostles.     For  which  family  tradition,  coming 


siderandura  esse  legem  circuracisionis  antifiufe  :  ut  intra  octavnm 
diem,  cum  qui  natus  est  baptizandnm  et  sanctificandum  non  putares, 
longe  aliud  in  Concilio  nosti'O  omnibus  visum  est.  In  hoc  enim  quod 
tu  putabas  esse  faciendum  nemo  consensit :  sed  universi  potius  judi- 
cavimus  nuUi  hominum  nato  misericordiam  Dei  et  gratiam  denegan- 
dam.  .  .  .  Nam  et  quod  vestigium  infantis  in  primus  partus  sui 
diebus  constituti  mundum  non  esse  dixisti,  quod  unusquisque  nos- 
trum horreat  exosculari :  nee  hoc  putamus  ad  ccclestem  gratiam 
dandam  impcdimento  esse  oportere.  ^ 


-150  A.  AP0S.3  PRACTICE  OF  THE  CHURCH.  61 

only  through  the  father  or  grandfather,  would  be  suffi- 
cient; which  is  a  kind  of  tradition  few  will  hesitate  to 
receive,  when  in  the  line  of  their  own  ancestors. 

And  be  it  further  observed,  that  the  whole  number, 
without  a  dissenting  voice,  decided  against  even  the  sec- 
ondary question  of  a  few  days  delay. 

Thus  far  the  way  is  open  and  clear  before  us.  Other 
testimony  might  have  been  introduced,  but  omitted,  be- 
cause deemed  unnecessary.  As  we  draw  nearer  to  the 
Apostolic  age,  the  number  of  writers  of  course  diminish, 
and  much  less  is  said  about  baptism,  but  enough  for  our 
purpose.  The  few  who  wrote  during  the  first  century 
and  early  part  of  the  second  after  the  Apostles,  were 
chiefly  engaged  in  opposing  heresies  and  combating  new 
doctrines.  Infant  baptism  not  being  one  of  these,  when 
referred  to,  is  introduced  in  an  incidental  way  in  connec- 
tion with  something  else,  similar  to  the  cases  already 
noticed. 

Tertullian,  to  whom  allusion  has  been  several  times 
made,  was  the  only  man  during  the  first  thousand 
years  of  Christianity,  so  far  as  we  can  learn,  that  did 
oppose  Infant  baptism,  and  he  only  when  there  was  no 
danger  of  death.  Nor  did  he  confine  himself  to  the  ^^ 
case  of  young  children,  but  embraced  the  young  and 
unmarried  of  both  sexes — virgins,  and  those  in  a  state  of 
widowhood. 

He  had  adopted  the  opinion  that  baptism  washed 
away  all  previous  sin,  whether  actual  or  original,  and 
hence  the  longer  delayed  the  better,  because  sins  com- 
mitted after  baptism,  could  not,  according  to  his  theory, 
be  washed  away  by  it.  Tertullian  was  a  man  of  lively 
6 


62  INFANT  BAPTISM.  [A.  Apos.  loo- 

imagination,  and  very  visionary.  He  left  tlie  Church, 
and  was  at  one  time  a  Montanist,  afterward  the  founder 
of  a  sect  called  after  his  own  name.  He  was  neverthe- 
less a  man  of  considerable  acquirements,  and  so  far  as 
a  public  practice  of  the  Church  is  concerned,  must  be 
received  as  a  very  competent  witness.  In  a  discourse 
on  baptism,  he  speaks  as  follows : 

"  Therefore  according  to  every  one's  condition  and  disposition, 
and  also  their  age,  the  delaying  of  baptism  is  more  profitable, 
especially  in  the  case  of  little  children.  For  what  need  is  there, 
except  in  great  necessity,  that  their  sponsors  should  be  brought 
into  danger?  Because  they  may  either  fail  of  their  promises  by 
death,  or  they  may  be  deceived  by  a  child's  proving  of  a  wicked  dis- 
position. Our  Lord  says,  indeed,  'Do  not  forbid  them  to  come 
unto  me.'  Let  them  come,  therefore,  when  they  are  grown  up ; 
let  them  come  when  they  can  learn ;  when  they  can  be  taught 
whither  it  is  they  come :  let  them  be  made  Christians,  when  they 
can  know  Christ.  What  need  their  innocent  age  make  such  haste 
to  the  forgiveness  of  sin  ?  Men  proceed  more  cautiously  in  worldly 
things  ;  and  he  that  is  not  trusted  with  earthly  goods,  shall  he  be 
trusted  with  divine?  Let  them  know  how  to  ask  salvation,  that 
you  may  appear  to  give  it  to  one  that  asketh.  For  no  less  reason 
unmarried  persons  ought  to  be  delayed,  because  they  are  exposed 
to  temptations,  as  well  as  virgins  that  are  come  to  maturity,  and 
those  that  are  in  widowhood  by  the  loss  of  their  consort,  until 
they  either  marry  or  be  confirmed  in  continence."^" — Tertulli- 

ANUS  DE  BaPTISMO,  C,  18. 

*  Itaque  pro  cujusque  persons  conditione  ac  dispoaitionc,  etiam 
aetate,  cunctatio  baptism!  utilior  est ;  praecipue  tamcn  circa  parvulos. 
Quid  enim  necesse  est  (si  nou  tamen  necesse)  sponsores  ctiam  pcricu- 
lo  ingori?  quia  et  ispi  per  mortahtatcm  destituere  promissioncs  suas 
possunt,  et  prevent  make  indolis  falli.  Ait  quidem  Dominus  Nolite 
illos  prohibere  ad  me  venire.  Yeniant  ergo  dum  adolescunt,  veniant 
dum  discunt,  dum  quo  veniant  doccntur ;  fiant  Christiani  quum  Chris- 
tum nossc  potuerint.  Quid  festinat  innocens  aetas  ad  remissionem 
peccatorum  ?  Cautius  ageter  in  secularibus  ;  ut  cui  substantia  terre- 
na  non  creditur  Diviua  credatur.  Korint  petere  salutem,  ut  petenti 
dedisse  videaris.     Nou  minori  de  causa  iunuptl  quoquc  procrastinaudi, 


-lOOA.  Aporf.]  PllACTICE  OF  THE  CHURCH.  68 

From  this  passage  it  is  evident  that  Tertullian  would 
delay  the  baptism  of  all  classes  till  by  age  or  other  cir- 
cumstances they  were  not  likely  to  be  brought  under 
strong  temptation  through  the  flesh.  That  all  unmar- 
ried persons,  both  those  who  had  never  been  married 
and  those  who  had  lost  their  partners,  should  be  kept 
waiting  till  they  were  either  married  or  confirmed  in 
chaste  single  life. 

Now  what  Church  in  Christendom  would  adopt  such 
views  as  these  ?  In  the  case  of  little  children,  baptism 
must  be  deferred  till  they  are  grown  up — and  then  till 
they  are  married,  or  by  age,  and  the  practice  of  virtue 
'' confirmed  in  continence."  ("Donee  aut  nubant  aut 
continentia  corroborentur.")  And  he  might  have  added 
better  than  all,  defer  the  baptism  of  every  one,  till  just 
before  death ;  and  then  all  their  sins  will  be  washed 
away,  and  no  time  allowed  to  sin  afterwards. 

It  was  the  adoption  of  this  theory — of  washing  away 
past  sin,  that  led  him  to  oppose  the  usage  of  the 
Church.  But  in  his  argument  he  does  not  venture  to 
say,  that  the  baptism  of  children  is  an  innovation  brought 
into  the  Church  since  the  days  of  the  Apostles,  or  that 
it  is  a  new  thing  in  the  Church.  He  merely  ventures 
to  oppose  it  on  the  grounds  of  "  greater  usefulness" — 
"  Utilior  est" — "it  is  more  useful,"  &c.  His  referring 
to  their  baptism  AT  all,  proves  that  it  was  customary 
then  to  baptize  young  children,  which  is  all  that  chiefly 
concerns  our  present  inquiry.     His  opinion  is  his  own. 

in  quibus  tentatio  praeparata  est ;  tam  virginibus  per  maturitatcra, 
quam  viduis  per  vacationem,  donee  aut  nubant  aut  continentia  cor- 
roborentur. 


64  INFANT  BAPTISM.  [A.  Apos.  100- 

The  practice  of  the  Church  is  what  we  desire  to  know — 
and  the  manner  in  which  he  alludes  to  it,  and  the  mode 
of  reasoning  pursued  bj  him  in  regard  to  it,  are  suffi- 
cient for  our  purpose.  For  he  refers  to  the  bap- 
tism of  young  children  in  the  same  way  that  he  refers 
to  other  classes  of  persons  usually  baptized,  and  argues 
the  point  in  a  way  that  proves  beyond  all  doubt,  that 
Infant  baptism  was  then  the  usage  of  the  Church.  "  For 
what  need  is  there,"  says  he,  "that  their  sponsors  (god- 
fathers) be  brought  into  danger,"  &c.  This  shows  not 
only  that  young  children  were  at  the  time  baptized,  but 
even  that  sponsors  were  then  used  at  their  baptism. 
How  could  he  refer  to  such  things  if  they  did  not  exist  ? 
He  also  attempts  to  reconcile  with  his  theory  a  pas- 
sage of  Scripture  which,  it  appears,  was  regarded  by 
himself  as  authority  for  bringing  young  children  into 
Christ's  kingdom.  "  Our  Saviour  (he  admits)  does  in- 
deed say,  'do  not  forbid  them  to  come  to  me,'  but  let 
them  come  when  they  are  grown  up — let  them  come 
when  they  learn — when  they  are  taught  whither  they 
are  coming."  By  referring  to  this  passage,  he  shows 
what  was  the  age  of  the  persons  (parvulos)  of  whom  he 
was  speaking,  and  also  how  the  passage  was  generally 
understood  in  that  early  age  of  the  Church.  He  was 
evidently  speaking  of  the  same  class  of  little  children 
that  were  brought  to  our  Saviour  by  their  mothers,  and 
which  He  took  up  in  his  arms  and  blessed,  saying  :  "Of 
such  is  the  kingdom  of  God,"  Mark  x.  14.  Their  infan- 
tile state,  is  further  manifest  by  his  speaking  of  them  as 
so  young  that  their  "  disposition  was  not  yet  unfolded" 
— that  they  did  not  "know  whither  they  were  coming" 


-100  A.  apos.]         practice  of  the  church.  65 

— were  unable  to  ask  for  themselves,  and  beino;  of  an 
innocent  "guiltless  age." 

But  be  it  observed  that  he  does  not  appeal  to  the 
usage  of  the  Church  at  that  time,  or  any  previous  period 
between  that  and  the  days  of  the  Apostles  to  sustain  his 
opinions.  He  does  not  say  that  it  is  not  the  uniform 
practice  of  the  Church,  or  a  new  thing  brought  into  the 
Church,  nor  intimate  anything  of  the  kind.  How  easily 
might  he  have  put  down  this  practice  and  establish  his 
own  theory  by  an  appeal  of  this  kind,  had  there  been 
any  ground  for  it.  And  how  natural  is  it  for  men  to 
appeal  to  the  strongest  known  authority  when  anxious 
to  establish  any  point.  The  absence  of  all  such  reason- 
ing is  of  itself,  strong  presumptive  proof  that  Ter- 
tullian  knew  all  the  testimony  was  on  the  other  side. 
For  we  cannot  suppose  a  man  of  his  acquirements  could 
not  trace  back  a  public  usage  of  the  Church  only  one 
hundred  years,  which  would  bring  him  to  the  Apostolic 
age.  The  whole  of  his  reasoning  shows  that  he  was 
trying  to  introduce  a  new  arrangement  in  the  Church, 
which  he  placed  entirely  on  grounds  of  expediency.  Nor 
does  it  appear  that  the  Church  or  the  Montanists  with 
whom  he  afterwards  unitedj  followed  his  opinions. 

Dr.  Wardlow,  of  Glasgow,  speaking  of  the  opinion  of 
Tertullian  on  this  point,  says — ''Emphasis  is  laid  on  the 
peculiar  opinion  of  this  Father.  But  the  question  be- 
fore us  is  not  one  of  opinion — but  of  fact.  Tertullian 
was  remarkable  for  singular  and  extravagant  opinions." 
"He  was  endowed,"  says  Mosheim,  "with  a  great 
genius,  but  seemed  deficient  in  point  of  judgment.  His 
piety  was  warm  and  vigorous,  but,  at  the  same  time,  me- 


66  INFANT  BAPTISM.  [A.  Apos.  100- 

lancholy  and  austere.  His  learning  was  extensive  and 
profound  ;  and  yet  his  credulity  and  superstition  was 
such  as  might  have  been  expected  from  the  darkest  ig- 
norance. And  with  respect  to  his  reasoning,  it  had 
more  of  that  subtlety  that  dazzles  the  imagination,  than 
of  that  solidity  that  brings  light  and  conviction  to  the 
mind."  On  the  particular  subject  before  us,  he  not  only 
advised  the  delay  of  baptism  in  the  case  of  infants,  but 
also  of  unmarried  persons.  Will  our.  Baptist  brethren 
admit  the  influence  as  to  the  latter,  which  they  draw  so 
complacently  as  to  the  former?  The  truth  is,  that,  as 
to  both,  the  legitimate  inference  is  the  very  contrary. 
The  very  advice  to  delay,  or  if  you  will,  the  condemna- 
tion of  baptism  in  infancy  (though  these  two  are  far 
from  being  the  same,  and  the  former  alone  properly  be- 
longs to  Tertullian,)  is  conclusive  evidence  of  the  pre- 
vious existence  of  the  practice.  This  is  the  point.  The 
opinion  is  nothing  to  the  purpose.  It  has  no  authority. 
If  our  Baptist  friends  think  it  has,  let  them  do  the  good 
old  father  justice,  and  follow  it  fully.  His  condemning 
the  practice  of  baptizing  infants  so  far  from  being  in 
their  favor,  militates  against  them.  It  not  only  proves 
its  previous  existence ;  it  proves  more.  It  proves  that 
it  was  no  innovation.  When  a  man  condemns  a  prac- 
tice, he  is  naturally  desirous  to  support  his  peculiar  views 
by  the  strongest  arguments.  Could  Tertullian,  there- 
fore, have  shown,  that  the  practice  was  of  recent  origin ; 
that  it  had  been  introduced  in  his  own  day,  or  even  at 
any  time  subsequent  to  the  lives  of  the  Apostles,  we 
have  every  reason  to  believe  he  would  have  availed  him- 
self of  a  ground   so    obvious,    and   so   conclusive.     It 


-100  A.  Apos.]  PRACTICE  OF  THE  CHURCH.  67 

proves  still  further,  that  the  baptism  of  infants  was  the 
general  practice  of  the  Church  in  Tertullian's  time. 
His  opinion  is  his  own.  It  is  that  of  a  dissentient  from 
the  universal  body  of  professing  Christians.  He  never 
pretends  to  say  that  any  part  of  the  Church  had  held 
or  acted  upon  it.  Of  his  ojmiion  and  advice,  then,  we 
may  say,  Valeant  quantum  valere  possunt.  But  the 
total  absence  of  any  attempt  to  support  and  recommend 
them,  by  appeal  to  the  practice  of  the  Church  in  Apos- 
tolic times,  or  of  any  part  of  the  Church  at  any  inter- 
vening period  between  tht)se  times  and  his  own,  certainly 
goes  far  to  prove  the  matter  of  fact,  with  which  alone 
we  have  to  do — that  ^'  Infant  haj)tism  was  the  original 
and  universal  loractice.''"^ 

The  fact  is,  that  even  Tertullian's  strong  love  for 
his  new  theory  on  baptism,  could  not  lead  him  away  so 
far,  as  to  induce  him  to  give  up  Infant  baptism  where 
there  was  danger  of  death.  In  the  passage  just  cited, 
the  clause  (si  non  tarn  neeesse)  "  except  in  great  neces- 
sity"— (meaning  danger  of  death)  is  in  all  of  the  older 
manuscripts.  Rigaltius  left  them  out  in  his  edition 
without  giving  any  reason  for  it.  Whilst  they  are  found 
in  the  .edition  of  Pamelius,  and  he  informs  us  that 
Gaigneus,  the  first  editor  of  the  book,  has  them.f 

Even  Baptist  writers  now  generally  admit,  that  this 
passage  of  Tertullian,  shows  that  the  baptism  of  young 
children  was  at  that  time  practiced  in  the  Church,  but 
endeavor  to  evade  its  force,  by  presuming  that  it  had 
"just  then  been  introduced."  But  on  what  authority  is  the 

*  Woods  on  Baptism. — See  Appendix. 

f  Wall's  history  of  Baptism,  3d  edition,  vol.  i.  pag-e  48. 


68  INFANT  BAPTISM.  [A.  Apos.  100- 

presumption  made  ?  Where  is  the  evidence  that  it  was 
just  then  begun  ?  There  is  not  one  word.  Tertullian's 
advising  its  delay  in  this  case,  can  be  no  evidence  of 
such  a  thing,  because  he  advised  the  delay  of  other 
classes  of  jyersoiis  which,  all  must  admit,  were  then  and 
ever  had  been  admitted  to  baptism  from  the  first  preach- 
ing of  the  Apostles.  He  does  not  say,  that  it  is  a  new 
thing,  nor  do  any  of  his  cotemporaries.  He  could 
easily  have  appealed  to  the  old  men  of  his  day,  (whose 
memories  would  carry  them  back  within  a  few  years  of 
the  Apostolic  age  itself,)  and  ^Vfio,  beyond  a  doubt,  would 
have  made  frequent  mention  of  the  fact,  had  it  been  in- 
troduced within  the  time  of  their  memories.  But  he 
neither  makes  such  an  appeal  nor  any  such  an  allusion. 
Hence  with  others  he  admitted  the  authority  for  this 
rite,  but  thought  that  now  Christianity  had  become 
more  general,  baptism  would  be  more  profitable  if 
delayed  in  certain  cases.  His  advice  to  delay  it  in  the 
case  of  children  is  no  index  of  even  his  own  opinion,  as 
to  its  authority,  for  if  he  advised  delay  to  one  class 
which  the  Apostles  baptized,  why  not  to  another  ?  This 
he  certainly  did  in  regard  to  young  men,  widows,  &c., 
and  why  suppose  he  entertained  a  difi'erent  opinion  in 
regard  to  infants  ?  Or,  if  he  questioned  the  divine  au- 
thority of  Infant  baptism,  why  did  he  -not  say  so  ?  He 
admits  in  other  portions  of  his  writings  that  "  every  soul 
is  reckoned  in  Adam,  until  it  be  enrolled  in  Christ,"  (de 
anima  c.  39,)  and  explains,  Cor.  vii.  14.  "  Else  were 
your  children  unclean  but  now  they  are  holy,"  to  refer 
to  their  religious  (not  civil)  privileges,  and  hence 
teaches  their  fitness  for   baptism.     But  his   theory  of 


-looA.  apos.]        practice  of  the  church.  69 

applying  baptism  to  only  past  sins,  led  him  to  advise  its 
delay. 

Such  is  the  authority  of  Tertullian — the  only  man  that 
did  oppose  Infant  baptism  during  the  first  four  hundred, 
aye,  the  first  tliousmid  years  of  Christianity.  This  is  the 
great  opponent  to  baptizing  young  children,  to  whose 
testimony  Baptists  so  often  appeal.  The  Great  Gun  so 
frequently  drawn  out  in  battle  array,  and  pointed  at  those 
who  dare  to  follow  the  practice  of  the  Apostles  and  pri- 
mitive Church,  in  baptizing  their  little  children. 

Examine  it,  and  you  will  no  longer  fear  it.  It  is  an 
empty  blunderbuss  which  can  do  no  harm. 

Tertullian's  opinion  is  that  of  an  unsound  mind,  based 
on  unsound  doctrine,  involving  principles  destructive  of 
the  plainest  teachings  of  our  Saviour.  His  testimony 
proves,  that  it  was  then  the  usage  of  the  Church  to  bap- 
tize Infants ;  his  advice  shows  that  he  reasoned  from 
false  premises ;  his  admission  that  Infants  ought  to  be 
baptized  in  danger  of  death,  or  his  theory  of  the  effects 
of  baptism  concedes  the  whole  question  as  a  matter  of 
principle,  that  little  children  are  proper  subjects  of  bap- 
tism. 

Had  he  embraced  correct  views  of  baptism  in  the  first 
place,  and  instead  of  applying  it  to  only  past  sins,  re- 
garded it  as  the  seal  of  a  covenant  co-extensive  with  the 
existence  of  man ;  we  should  never  have  heard  of  Tertul- 
lian as  an  opposer — or  rather  as  the  advocate  for  the 
postponement,  of  all  baptism  till  late  in  life,  or  just  be- 
fore death. 

We  have  dwelt  longer  on  the  testimony  of  this  Father 
than  its  importance  demanded,  because  his  name  is  so 


70  INFANT  BAPTISM.  [A.  Apos.  100— 

often,  quoted  by  persons  who  never  take  the  trouble  to 
examine  his  writings.  As  to  the  usage  of  the  Church 
in  his  time,  that  is  placed  beyond  all  doubt  by  contem- 
poraneous authority.  It  does  not  admit  of  controversy. 
The  evidence  on  this  point  will  be  adduced  in  the  next 
chapter,  with  other  proof  that  Infant  baptism  was  the 
doctrine  and  practice  of  the  Church  in  the  first  century 
after  the  Apostles,  and  before  Tertullian  was  born. 


CHAPTER  III. 


HISTORICAL  TESTIMONY  CONTINUED. 

Origen  born  of  Christian  parents — His  piety,  learning  and  travels — His 
declai-ation  that  Infant  Baptism  is  the  usage  of  the  whole  Church,  hand- 
ed doTvn  by  the  Apostles — Care  of  early  Christians  to  preserve  the  true 
faith — Ireneus  hearer  of  Polycarp,  the  pupil  of  St.  John — His  zeal  for 
Apostolic  usage — Use  of  the  term  regeneration,  and  testimony  to  the 
Baptism  of  all  ages — Agreement  of  various  sects  on  this  point — Inter- 
pretation of  St.  John  iii.  5  and  Titus  iii.  5. 

Origen  was  a  cotemporary  of  Tertullian — born  about 
eigbty-four  years  after  tbe  deatb  of  St  John,  of  Chris- 
tian parents,  himself  baptized  in  infancy,  and  the  most 
learned  man  of  his  day.  ^'His  works,"  says  Wadding- 
ton,  "  exhibit  the  operation  of  a  bold  and  comprehensive 
mind,  burning  with  religious  warmth,  unrestrained  by 
any  low  prejudices  or  interests,  and  sincerely  bent  on 
the  attainment  of  truth." 

In  his  commentary  on  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans,  he 
is  led  to  speak  of  the  inherent  corruption  of  every  one 
born  in  the  world,  and  refers  to  David  as  teaching  the 
same  doctrine,  in  the  fifty-first  Psalm — where  he  says  : 
"In  sin  did  my  mother  conceive  me."  Concerning  which 
he  says,  "  there  is  in  the  history  no  account  of  any  par- 
ticular sin  that  his  mother  had  committed,"  and  adds: 

"  For  this  also  it  was,  that  the  Church  had  from  the  Apostles  i 
the  tradition  (or  injunction)  to  give  baptism  to  young  children.-f 
For  they,  to  -whom  the  Divine  mysteries  were  committed,  knew 


72  INFANT  BAPTISM.  [A.  Apos.  110- 

that  there  is  In  all  persons  the  natural  pollution  of  sin,  which 
must  be  done  away  by  water  and  the  Spirit,  on  account  of  which 
the  body  itself  is  also  called  the  body  of  sm."f — Comment,  on 
-Epist.  ad  Romanos,  Lib.  5. 

In  this  passage,  Origen  appeals  to  Infant  baptism  as 
tlie  usage  of  the  Church,  not  only  at  that  time,  but  as 
handed  down  from  the  Apostles.  Nor  does  he  seem  to 
add  the  latter  clause  of  the  sentence  to  give  authority 
for  the  usage,  but  merely  refers  to  it  as  an  acknowledged 
and  undisputed  truth,  believed  by  all.  Adduced,  as  he 
would  any  other  acknowledged  truth,  to  bear  on  the 
point  before  him- — namely,  the  corrupt  nature  of  every 
one  that  is  born  into  the  world.  ^'  Tradition"  was  a 
term  at  that  early  period  used  for  what  was  written  as 
well  as  delivered  orally:*  and  was  regarded  as  including 
the  written  words  of  the  Apostles,  as  well  as  those  un- 
written. The  Apostle  Paul  uses  the  term  in  the  same 
way—"  Hold  the  traditions  which  you  have  been  taught, 

•5^  The  term  traditio — TtapSojtf  "  tradition,"  as  used  by  the  ancient 
Fathers,  signifies  good  and  credible  evidence  delivered  by  one  person 
to  another,  either  written  or  by  speaking ;  and  is  applied  even  to  the 
Gospels,  which  were  called  (Suicer.  Thesaur.  Tom.  ii.)  Evayy sT^ixaf, 
rtapaSojiij,  ''  traditionary  gospels." — C.  Taylor. 

Gregory  Nazianzen  calls  the  books  of  the  Xew  Testament — "  The 
Evangelical  and  Apostolical  traditions."      (EvayyeUxais  ts  xac  artoj 

Tertullian,  referring  to  portions  of  the  New  Testament,  exhorts  their 
opposers  to  "  believe  what  is  delivered."     Crede  quod  traditmn  est. 

Hyppolytus,  the  Martyr,  quoting  certain  passages  of  the  New  Tes- 
tament, calls  on  his  brethren,  saying,  "Let  us  believe,  dear  brethren, 
according  to  the  tradition  of  the  Apostles,  (^xata  -tTjv  TtapaSojcv  tcov 
iXTioi'to^.'kcov. —  Goode's  Divine  Rule  of  Faith  and  Practice^  vol.  i.  p.  18, 
andfolloicing. 

f  Pro  hoc  et  Ecclesia  ab  apostolis  traditionera  suscepit  etiam  par- 
vulis  baptisraum  dare.  vSciebant  enim  illi  quibus  raysteriorum  secreta 
commissa  sunt  Divinorum,  quia  essent  in  omnibus  genuine  sordes 
peccati,  quae  per  aquam  et  spiritum  ablui  deberent,  propter  quas  etiam 
corpus  ipsum,  corpus  peccati,  nominatur. 


—no  A.  Apos.]  practice  of  the  CHURCH.  73 

whether  by  word  or  our  Epistle."  (2  Thess.  ii.  15.) 
Although  this  term  has  been  variously  used  since  that 
time,  and  made  the  cloak  of  many  errors,  it  was  at  that 
early  period  of  binding  authority,  and  doubtless  referred 
to  by  Origen  as  such.  "Which  shows  the  antiquity  and 
authority  of  Infant  baptism  at  that  time. 

Origen  was  a  warm  advocate  of  innate  corruption ;  his 
mind  is  said  to  have  been  tinctured  with  the  Platonic 
philosophy,  but  that  does  not  affect  his  testimony  as  a 
witness  to  what  was  the  daily  practice  of  the  Church. 
He  could  not  be  deceived  in  regard  to  a  fact  that  was 
constantly  occurring  before  his  eyes.  And  his  theory 
of  natural  corruption  led  him  to  refer  oftener  to  the 
baptism  of  infants  than  he  would  otherwise  have  done, 
because  this  he  regarded  as  acknowledged  authority  for 
the  depravity  of  every  one  born  into  the  world.  In  a 
Homily  on  a  part  of  Leviticus,  he  refers  also  to  the  same 
words  of  David  just  noticed,  saying  : 

"  Hear  David  speaking  :  '  In  iniquities  I  Tras  conceived/  says 
he,  '  and  in  sins  did  my  mother  bring  me  forth :'  showing  that 
every  soul  born  in  the  flesh  is  polluted  with  the  filth  of  sin  and 
iniquity  ;  and  that  on  this  account,  that  was  said,  which  we  men- 
tioned before:  '  no  one  is  clean  from  pollution,  though  his  life  is 
but  the  length  of  one  day/ 

"  Besides  all  this,  it  may  be  learnt,  since  the  baptism  of  the 
Church  is  given  for  the  remission  of  sins  ;  why,  according  to  the 
usage  of  the  Church  it  is  likewise  given  to  little  children :  where- 
as, if  there  was  nothing  in  little  children  that  needed  remission 
and  mercy,  the  grace  of  baptism  would  be  superfluous  to  them."* 
— HoMiLiA  8  IN  Lev.  Tom.  I.  p.  145. 

*  Audi  David  diceutera  ;  In  iniquitatibus  inquit,  conceptus  sum  et 
in  peccatis  peperit  me  mater  mea  :  ostendens  quod  quaecunque^anima 

7 


74  INFANT  BAPTISM.  [A.  Apos.  Iio- 

Thus  again  we  find  him  appealing  to  the  "  usage"  of 
the  Church  in  baptizing  young  children  as  a  thing  con- 
firmatory of  the  doctrine  of  original  sin.  For  he  refers 
to  this  usage  of  the  Church,  as  confirming  what  he  had 
akeady  said,  and  supposes  the  doctrine  he  was  advoca- 
ting to  be  the  reason,  or  groundwork  of  this  practice — 
^'  handed  down  from  the  Apostles."  Addi  his  etiam 
illud  potest — literally  "This  may  be  added  to  these," 
that  is,  in  addition  to  what  has  been  already  said,  we 
can  now  understand  why  the  Church  administers  to  lit- 
tle children  the  rite  of  the  washing  away  of  sin  ;  for  if 
infants  were  free  from  a  sinful  nature,  it  would  be  super- 
fluous to  them.  With  the  nature  of  his  argument  we 
have  nothing  now  to  do.  So  far  as  the  usage  of  the 
Church  is  concerned,  this  is  as  plain  and  as  much  to  the 
point  as  we  can  desire  it  to  be. 

In  his  commentary  on  St.  Luke's  gospel,  he  again 
uses  the  same  kind  of  argument,  and  testifies  as  une- 
quivocally to  the  practice  of  Infant  baptism. 

"  Little  children  are  "baptized  for  the  forgiveness  of  sins.  Of 
what  sins  ?  Or  when  did  thej  commit  them  ?  Or  how  can  any 
reason  be  given  for  baptizing  them,  but  only  according  to  that 
sense  which  we  mentioned  a  little  before  :  '  none  is  free  from  pol- 
lution, though  his  life  be  but  the  length  of  one  day  upon  the 
earth.'     And  for  that  reason  infants  arc  baptized,   because  by 


in  came  nascatur,  iniquitatis  et  peccati  sorde  polluitur  et  propterea 
dictum  esse  illud  quod  jam  superius  memoravimus  ;  quia  nemo  raua- 
dus  a  sorde,  nee  si  unius  diei  fuerit  vita  ejus.  Addi  his  etiam  illud 
potest,  ut  requiratur  quid  causse  sit,  cum  baptisma  ecclesire  in  remis- 
sionem  peccatorum  detur,  secundum  ecclesire  observantiam  etiam 
parvulis  quod  ad  remlssioncm  deberet  et  indulgentiam  pertinore  gratiiA 
baptism!  superflua  videretur. 


— lluA.  Apos.]  practice  UF  the  CHURCH.  ib 

i 
I   the  sacrament  of  baptism,  the  pollution  of  our  birth  is  taken 

/     away."^ — Homil.  in  Lucam,  tom.  ii.  p.  223. 

To  this  might  be  added  jet  other  passages  from  the 
writings  of  Origen  to  the  same  effect,  but  enough  is 
given  to  satisfy  any  reasonable  mind.  Let  it  now  be 
remarked,  first — that  infant  baptism  is  not  of  itself  a 
matter  of  dispute,  but  introduced  in  connection  with  an- 
other question,  second — that  it  is  appealed  to,  as  if  a  thing 
the  authority  of  which  no  one  doubted.  So  certain  was 
Origen  that  all  would  admit  the  authority  of  this  rite, 
that  he  based  his  reasoning  on  the  ground,  that  a  denial 
of  natural  corruption  would  come  in  conflict  with  the 
apostolic  rite  of  Infant  baptism.  For  (says  he)  it  was 
for  this  reason  that  the-  "  Church  had  from  the  Apostles 
the  tradition  to  give  baptism  to  young  children."  In- 
fant baptism  is  therefore  brought  in  incidentally,  and  in 
such  a  way  as  to  prove  that  it  was  the  established, 
honored,  and  universally  acknowledged  doctrine  of  the 
Church  at  that  time. 

As  to  the  authority  of  these  passages — it  so  happened 
that  two  different  writers  made  translations  of  the 
writings  of  Origen  in  the  next  century  after  he  wrote, 
and  they  belonging  to  opposite  parties  on  many  points 
of  which  he  treats,  but  in  both  of  which  the  doctrine  of 
Infant  Baptism  is  fully  set  forth,  which  makes  his  testi- 
mony even  more  certain  than  if  found  only  in  the  origi- 

*  Parvuli  baptizantur  in  remissionem  peccatorum.  Quorum  pecca- 
torum?  Yel  quo  tempore  peccaverunt?  Aut  quomodo  potest  ulla 
lavacri  in  parvulis  ratio  subsistere,  nisi  juxta  ilium  sensum  de  quo 
paulo  ante  diximus  ;  Xullus  mundus  a  sorde,  ncc  si  unius  diei  quidem 
fuerit  vita  ejus  super  terram  ?  Et  quia  per  baptism!  sacramentum 
nativitatis  sordes  deponuntur,  propterea  baptizantur  et  parvuli. 


76  INFANT  BAPTISM.  [A.  Apos.  110- 

nal  works  purporting  to  be  his  own.  The  passages 
already  adduced  are  from  both  translators — two  from 
RuFiNUS,  and  one  from  Jerome.  Others  could  be  ad- 
duced were  it  necessary. 

Before  we  proceed,  however,  to  the  next  witness,  we 
will  consider  the  many  advantages  possessed  by  Origen, 
to  know  whether  this  "usage  of  the  Church  was  handed 
down  from  the  Apostles"  and  universal.  In  regard  to 
his  learning  and  piety,  as  has  been  already  remarked, 
the  Church  in  that  age  did  not  possess  his  equal.  "  He 
was  a  man  (says  Mosheim)  of  great  and  uncommon  abili- 
ties, and  the  greatest  luminary  of  the  Christian  world — 
the  immensity  of  whose  genius,  and  the  fervor  of  whose 
piety — whose  indefatigable  patience,  extensive  erudition, 
and  other  eminent  and  superior  talents,  all  enconiums 
must  have  fallen  short  had  his  judgment  been  in  corres- 
pondence. Yet  such  as  he  was,  his  virtues  and  his  labors 
deserve  the  admiration  of  all  ages :  and  his  name  will 
be  transmitted  with  honor  through  the  annals  of  time 
as  long  as  learning  and  genius  shall  be  esteemed  among 
men." 

And  besides  this  he  had  enjoyed  other  advantages  to 
qualify  him  to  speak  on  this  subject.  Eusebius  informs 
us  that  he  was  born  and  bred  in  Alexandria — lived  some 
time  in  Greece  and  in  Rome — visited  Cappadocia  and 
Arabia  in  his  travels,  spending  some  time  in  each — and 
passed  the  greater  part  of  his  life  in  Syria  and  Pales- 
tine, the  seat  of  the  first  Churches.* 

Thus,  added  to  the  other  means  which  men  of  learning 

*  Eusebius,  liber  6. 


-110  A.  Apos.]  practice  of  the  CHURCH.  i  i 

possess  for  knowing  the  doctrines  of  their  Church,  Ori- 
GEN  could  speak  from  personal  ohservation  in  regard  to 
Infant  baptism,  in  all  these  portions  of  the  world — Alex- 
andria, Greece,  Kome,  Cappadocia,  Arabia,  Syria,  and 
Palestine.  Now  mark,  a  man  born  only  eighty-four 
years  from  the  Apostles'  times,  of  Christian  parents, 
baptized  and  taught  the  Scriptures  from  infancy,  re- 
markable for  his  piety  in  boyhood,  in  mature  manhood 
the  "brightest  luminary  of  his  day,"  and  having  visited 
all  these  portions  of  the  world — appeals  in  his  written 
works  to  Infant  baptism,  as  a  public  rite  of  the  Church, 
handed  down  by  the  Apostles,  and  as  such  received  and  ob- 
served by  all.  And  this  referred  to  in  elucidating  another 
doctrine.  Can  any  reasonable  man  suppose  Origen 
would  appeal  in  an  argument  to  a  rite,  and  that  fre- 
quently, concerning  which,  there  was  any  doubt  ? 
Would  a  man  whose  fame  had  spread  over  Christendom, 
risk  his  reputation  and  his  cause  by  making  such  appeals, 
without  giving  reasons  in  support  of  that  to  which  he 
appealed,  had  there  been  any  question  about  its  Divine 
authority  ?  Assuredly  not.  Origen  by  appealing  to 
Infant  baptism  in  support  of  other  doctrines,  and  taking 
for  granted  its  Divine  authority ;  and  Tertullian  by  re- 
ferring to  it,  because  in  some  measure  conflicting  with  a 
favorite  theory,  and  yet  not  calling  in  question  its  Divine 
authority,  establish  beyond  all  doubt  both  the  prevalence 
and  antiquity  of  the  rite. 

These  two  writers  lived  in  different  parts  of  the  world. 
Tertullian  wrote  the  earlier  of  the  two,  but  beino;  born  of 
heathen  parents  was  converted  to  Christianity  in  adult 
age,  while  Origen  enjoyed  the  privilege  of  descending 

7* 


78  INFANT  BAPTISM.  [A.  Apos.  110- 

I  from  Christian  parents,  and  of  being  taught  the  Chris- 

Ltian  doctrine  from  childhood. 

To  doubt  whether  these  two  men  could  trace  back  a 
public  rite  in  the  Church,  the  short  time  intervening  be- 
tween them  and  the  Apostolic  age,  is  to  deny  all  that 
the  learned  have  said  in  regard  to  their  mental  endow- 
ments. Tertullian  at  the  time  he  wrote,  need  go  no 
farther  than  to  ask  the  old  men  then  living,  whether 
their  own  fathers  practiced  it.  jjOrigen's  ancestors  being 
Christians  from  the  middle  of  the  Apostolic  age,  he  need 
[„iix)t  have  gone  out  of  his  family  to  inquire  ; — for  his 
biographer  informs  us  that  ^'  the  Christian  doctrine  was 
conveyed  to  him  by  his  forefathers."*  RuriNUS  trans- 
lates it,  "grandfathers  and  great-grandfathers,"  which 
would  reach  back  into  the  middle  of  the  Apostolic  age. 
Origen's  own  father  practiced  it.  And  if  his  father  be- 
fore him  did  the  same,  (and  no  one  called  it  in  question) 
this  was  as  far  as  he  need  go.  For  this  would  reach 
the  days  of  the  Apostles,  and  if  practiced  under,  and 
sanctioned  by  them,  we  need  no  higher  authority. 

They  were  the  authorized  agents  of  Christ  "  endued 
with  power  from  on  High,"  and  set  apart  for  the  express 
work,  of  building  up  His  Kingdom  on  earth.  The 
Saviour  did  not  himself  baptize,  nor  did  the  Gospel 
Church  assume  any  definite  form  or  structure  while  He 
was  on  earth.  But  He  prepared  the  way  and  made 
ready  all  that  was  necessary,  and  then  committed  to 
his  Apostles  the  duty  of  executing  and  consummating 
what  He  had  taught  them  concerning  his  Kingdom. 
^  They  were  commissioned  "to  disciple  all  nations,  bap- 

"^  Enscbius. 


-llOA.  Apos.]  PRACTICE  OF  THE  CHURCH.  79 

tizing  them  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son, 
and  of  the  Holy  Ghost ;  teaching  them  to  observe  all 
things  whatsoever  (He)  had  commanded  them."  With 
the  promise,  "  Lo  I  am  with  you  alway,  even  unto  the 
end  of  the  world."  Matt,  xxviii.  19-20.  And  after  his 
resurrection,  he  continued  with  them  forty  days  longer, 
instructing  them,* — "  speaking  of  the  things  pertaining 
to  the  kingdom  of  God."t 

He  also  commanded  them  to  tarry  at  Jerusalem,  after 
his  ascension,  until  they  were  baptized  by  the  Holy 
Ghost,  which  would  complete  their  qualification  for  the 
great  work  to  which  he  had  assigned  them.  And  on  the 
day  of  Pentecost  the  Holy  Ghost  was  accordingly  pour- 
ed out  upon  them,  and  miraculous  gifts  conferred — and 
then  it  was,  the  New  Dispensation  proper  begun. 

The  thousands  soon  converted, J  called  forth  the  appli- 
cation of  principles  that  gave  the  visible  form,  and  re- 
sulted in  the  organization,  peculiar  to  the  Christian 
Church. 

The  inspired  Apostles  being  the  appointed  agents  of 
Christ,  and  qualified  by  the  Holy  Ghost  for  this  work, 
whatever  they  sanctioned  and  practiced  as  essential  ele- 
ments in  the  Christian  Church  has  an  authority  to  which 
we  must  all  submit.  In  a  matter  so  fundamental  as  the 
subjects  of  baptism,  there  can  be  no  appeal  from  their 
teaching  and  practice.  If  they  sanctioned  Infant  bap- 
tism, the  question  as  to  its  authority  is  settled.  We  need 
nothing  more  on  that  point. 

The  Apostle  John  lived  beyond  the  close  of  the  first 
century,  and  wrote  his  "  General  Epistle,"  as  late  as 

*  St.  Luke  xxiv.  45.  f  Acts  i.  3.  %  Acts  ii.  41-47. 


80  INFANT  BAPTISM.  [A.  Apos.  110- 

91  or  92  A.  D.  The  object  of  which  was  to  refute  the 
prevailing  errors  of  that  period.  And  had  Infant  bap- 
tism been  one  of  them,  he  would  have  referred  to  it  as 
such,  beyond  all  doubt.  But  it  is  not  included  among 
those  errors,  and,  therefore,  if  in  use  at  that  time,  it 
was  with  his   approbation  and  has  all  the  authority  we 

-need. 

Nor  ought  the  teaching  and  influence  of  the  Apostles 
to  be  confined  to  the  age  in  which  they  lived.  "  To 
commit  to  faithful  men,  able  to  teach  others  also,"  the 
charge  of  the  Churches,  was  their  anxious  concern.* 
And  of  these  "  faithful  men,"  there  were  somez^e  knoiv^ 
who  did  not  fail  to  fulfill  all  that  was  expected  of  them 
— all  that  their  responsible  position  demanded. 

Polycarp,  for  instance,  who  lived  through  the  whole 
timeliearly,  between  the  death  of  St.  John  and  birth  of 
Origen,  has  the  attestation  of  the  Holy  Spirit  to  his 
faithfulness  to  his  charge.  He  is  commended  by  Him 
who  is  the  "First  and  the  Last,"  as  the  ''Angel 
(Bishop)  of  the  Church  of  Smyrna."  Rev.  ii.  8-10. — 
"  jSe  alivays  taught  ivhat  he  had  learned  from  the  Apos- 
tles^ ivhat  the  Church  had  handed  down,  and  ivhat  is 
the  one  only  true  doctrine,'' — writes  a  cotemporary.f 
"/ie  was  remarMhle  for  his  vigilance  and  strict  adher- 
ence to  the  one  only  true  faith  lohich  had  heen  taught 
him  by  the  Apostles,'' — adds  Eusebius.J 

-  "Under  such  a  man  as  this,  it  requires  some  evidence 
of  the  fact  to  induce  us  to  believe  that  an  innovation  on 
the  most  public  and  well  known  usage  of  the  Church 

*  2  Tim.  ii.  3.  f  Ircnciis.  "l  Lib.  4.  chap.  xiv.  15. 


-no  A.  Apos.]  practice  of  THE  CHUKCH.  81 

was  introduced,  and  neither  he  nor  any  other  taught  by 
the  Apostles,  raised  their  voice  against  it.  Yet,  who 
has  ever  read  or  heard  of  even  an  allusion  to  such  an 
innovation  or  complaint  in  his  day  ?  And  could  the  Holy 
Spirit  mistake  the  character  of  Polycarp  ?  And  is  all 
that  the  venerated  Ireneus  has  said  of  him  false  ? 

Instead  of  anything  to  suggest  such  a  supposition, 
everything  known,  confirms  the  opposite  opinion.  Origen 
who  was  born  only  a  few  years  after  his  death,  tells  us, 
that  "  Infant  baptism  was  handed  down  by  the  Apos- 
tles."* Thus  confirming  the  faithfulness  of  Polycarp 
and  the  testimony  of  Ireneus  concerning  him — and  also, 
the  Divine  autliority  of  Infant  baptism.  For  if  it  was 
not  introduced  during  the  time  of  Polycarp,  which  filled 
up  the  space  between  the  Apostolic  age  and  the  birth  of 
Origen,  it  was  of  course  practiced  by  the  Apostles. 

And  as  to  the  means  and  ability  of  Origen  to  ascer- 
tain whether  this  rite  was  in  use  among  the  Apostles, 
there  can  be  no  controversy.  He  it  was  who  made  the 
first  catalogue  of  the  dijBferent  books  that  compose  the 
New  Testament  canon.  For  as  yet  the  whole  of  the 
writings  of  the  New  Testament  had  not  been  collected 
together  and  put  into  the  possession  of  all  the  Churches. 
Nor  had  it  been  determined  how  many  of  those  claiming 
inspired  authority  should  be  received  into  our  present 
canon.  And  to  no  one  member  of  the  primitive  Church 
are  we  more  indebted  for  his  labors,  or  did  the  Church 
pay  greater  deference  in  settling  this  question,  than  to 
this  Father. 

*  Comment  ad  Romanus,  lib.  5. 


82  INFANT  BAPTISM.  [A.  Apos.  lio- 

Shall  we  then  admit  the  authority  of  his  testimony  in 
regard  to  the  books  of  the  New  Testament,  but  reject  it 
in  regard  to  Infant  baptism  ?  Admit  the  greater,  but 
deny  the  less  ! 

What,  reject  the  authority  of  such  a  man  as  this, 
and  believe  without  07ie  luord  of  evidence,  that  this 
"great  innovation,  the  source  of  so  many  evils,"*  ac- 
cording to  some  Baptist  writers  and  declaimers,  was 
palmed  on  the  Christian  Church,  with  the  connivance  of 
the  most  vigilant  and  faithful  guardians  through  whose 
hands  it  has  ever  passed,  and  who  for  its  preservation 
and  the  defence  of  the  truth,  suitered  martyrdom  at 
the  stake  and  in  the  amphitheatre  ?  Pause,  dear  reader, 
and  think  before  you  act.  You  are  to  decide,  not  be- 
tween two  new  doctrines,  which  to  adopt,  but  whether 
you  will  denounce  and  cast  out  of  the  Church,  that 
which  you  find  to  be  its  doctrine  and  practice  in  every 
age  since  the  Apostles,  and  always  believed  to  be  p'(7(?- 
ticed  hy  them,  and  no  evidence  to  the  contrary?  Will 
you  then  adopt  the  '■^surmise,''  (for  that  is  all,)  and  ex- 
clude little  children  from  God's  covenanted  blessin<2;s,  a 
privilege  which  they  have  enjoyed  ever  since  God  has  had 
a  visible  people  on  earth,  because  forsooth,  Infant  bap- 
tism is  not  taught  in  the  New  Testament,  in  the  way 
which  some  men  choose  to  prescribe  to  the  Holy 
Spirit  ?  Remember,  whether  you  have  children  of  your 
own,  or  not,  by  uniting  with  those  who  proscribe  the  bap- 
tism of  children,  you  thereby  unite  in  excluding  from  the 
covenanted  blessings  of  the  Gospel,  all  the  little  ones  of 

*  Howell's  Evils  of  Infant  Bnptism. 


-no  A.  apos.]        practice  of  the  church.  83 

present  and  coming  generations  !  First  let  the  inquiry 
be  well  pondered.  If  the  rejecters  of  Infant  baptism  can- 
not show  when,  nor  lioiv,  it  began ;  and  it  has  been  the 
practice  of  Christians  in  every  age  since  the  Apostles, 
and  received  by  them  as  the  doctrine  and  practice  of  the 
Apostles — on  what  ground  is  it  now  resisted  ?  Is  there 
anything  in  the  Bible  that  excludes  them  from  the  New 
Covenant?  To  which  Ave  answer  unhesitatingly,  not  one 
zvord,  that  does  not  apply  with  equal  force  to  the  Old 
Covenant — into  which  they  were  always  received. 

The  commission  under  the  New,  makes  no  exception 
to  little  children,  but  on  the  contrary,  St.  Peter  de- 
clares, that  the  promises  are  ''to  the  children,''  as  well 
as  to  their  parents'^ — the  Saviour  took  the  little  children 
up  into  his  arms  and  blessed  them — saying,  "  Of  such'' 
was  his  kingdom. f  Family  baptisms  are  recorded  as  a 
common  thing. J  And  chiklren  numbered  among  the 
saints  in  the  Epistles,  addressell  to  the  Churches,  and 
instructions  given  to  them,  and  concerning  them.^ 

But  lest  we  anticipate  too  much,  we  return  to  the 
Historical  branch  of  evidence,  and  examine  further,  first, 
the  testimony  of  Ireneus. 

Iren.eus  was-  born  before  the  death  of  St.  John,  and 
was  for  some  years  a  hearer  of  Poly  carp,  the  pupil  and 
intimate  friend  of  St.  John  himself.  About  the  year 
47  after  the  Apostles,  he  was  made  assistant  to  Po- 
thinus,  bishop  of  Lyons,  in  France,  and  succeeded  to 
the  Episcopal  office  in  the  year  69.  His  writings  are 
appealed  to,  and  received  by  all  generally  called   Or- 

^  Acts  ii.  38—39.  f  Islixii.  xix.  13.     Luke  xviii.  15. 

+  Acts  XYi.  13—15.  i  Eph.  Y.  14.     Col.  iii.  20,  21. 


84  INFANT  BAPTISM.  [A.  Apos.  110- 

thodox  Christians,  and  are  believed  to  have  been  more 
useful  in  the  second  century  than  those  of  any  other 
"VTriter  of  that  age.  He  is  also  believed  to  have  been 
more  successful  in  arresting  heresy,  and  preserving  the 
"  one  true  faith''  than  any  other  man  of  his  day. 

During  the  second  and  several  succeeding  centuries 
baptism  was  spoken  of  very  generally  under  the  name  of 
^'  regeneration^  And  whenever  the  term  regeneration 
was  used,  as  expressive  of  one's  relation  to  God,  it 
always  included  baptism,  though  often  times  more  be- 
sides. The  Apostle's  form  of  expression  "  tlie  washing 
(or  baptism)  of  regeneration^'  was  much  in  vogue.  And 
the  doctrine  generally  received  that  the  act  of  baptism 
not  only  changed  the  state  and  relation  to  God  of  the 
person  baptized,  but  conferred  other  blessings  also,  the 
extent  and  peculiar  character  of  which  are  not  very 
clearly  defined.  Be  the  nature  of  the  change,  however, 
what  it  may,  it  was  customary  to  call  it  "  regeneration'" 
— and  whenever  this  term  was  applied  to  persons,  it  in- 
variably included  baptism  under  it. 

For  instance,  Justin  Martyr,  referring  to  the  mo(ie 
of  receiving  members  into  the  Church,  says — "  Then 
we  bring  them  to  a  place  where  there  is  water,  and  we 
regenerate  them,  by  the  same  way  of  regeneration  by 
which  we  are  regenerated,  for  they  are  washed  Avith 
water  in  the  name  of  God  the  Father  and  Lord  of  all 
things,"  &c.*  Every  reader  must  see  that  he  means 
they  are  regenerated  by  baptism,  or  that  baptism  is 
implied   in   the   term    '^  regenerated."      For    he    says, 

■^  Justini  Apologia  prima. 


-67  A.  apos.]  practice  of  the  church.  85 

"they  are  regenerated  by  the  same  way  oi  regeneration 
by  which  we  were  regenerated.,  for  they  are  washed  with 
water,"  &c. 

Clemens  Alexandrinus,  in  reply  to  the  sect  of  Yalen- 
tinians,  who  contended  that  various  ceremonies  v/hich 
they  had  added  to  baptism,  must  be  observed,  before 
one  is  in  a  complete  state  of  Christianity,  or  perfectly 
initiated,  asks  "whether  Christ,  as  soon  as  He  was 
regenerated,  was  perfect  ?  Or  whether  he  still  wanted 
something  to  put  him  into  a  complete  state  of  John's  dis- 
pensation," etc.  And  then  adds — "As  soon  as  baptized 
by  John  he  was  perfect — he  Avas  perfected  by  the  wash- 
ing alone."* 

Here  baptism  is  again  included  in  the  term  "  rege- 
nerate.'' "  As  soon  as  he  was  regenerated  (baptized) 
he  was  perfectly  initiated.''  Both  of  these  men  lived  in 
the  sape  age  with  Ireneus,  who  referring  to  the  same 
sect  of  Yalentinians,  who  had  corrupted  baptism  by  their 
various  ceremonies,  says,  "  this  generation  of  heretics 
has  been  sent  out  by  Satan,  for  the  frustration  of  tlie 
baptism  of  regeneration  unto  God,  and  the  destruction 
of  our  whole  faith. "f  Again,  in  his  third  book,  c.  15, 
he  says — "  when  he  (Christ)  gave  his  Apostles  the  com- 
mission of  regenerating  unto  God — and  mark  the  phrase- 
ology— he  said  go  and  disciple  all  nations,  baptizing 
them  in  the  name  of  tlie  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of 
the  Holy  Ghost."  Thus  including  baptism  under  the 
same  form  of  expression  he  had  used  in  regard  to  the 
Valentinians,  i.  e.  "  regenerating  unto  God.'' 


Clem.  Alox.  Pedagog.  lib.  1.  c.  6.  f  Iron.  lib.  1.  c.  18. 

8 


>^6  IKFANT  BAPTISM.  [A.  Aros  67- 

Now,  see  how  he  applies  this  same  term  to  young 
children  : 

For  he  [Christ]  came  to  save  all  persons  by  himself:  all,  I 
mean,  AA'ho  are  by  him  regenerated  unto  God — Infants  and  little 
ones,  and  children  and  youths,  and  elder  persons.  Therefore,  he 
■went  through  the  different  ages:  for  Infants  being  made  an  infant, 
sanctifying  Infants  :  to  little  ones,  he  was  made  a  little  one,  sanc- 
tifying those  of  that  age,  and  also  giving  them  an  example  of 
godliness,  justice,  and  dutifulness.  To  youths  he  was  a  youth, ^^ 
&c.,t  continuing  on  through  the  different  ages,  setting  them  an 
example  of  a  holy  life. — Ireneus  Adv.  Her.  Lib.  11,  cap.  18. 

Here  he  applies  to  Infants,  and  every  succeeding 
stage  of  life,  not  only  the  same  term  under  which  he 
always  included  baptism,  when  applied  to  the  living, 
but  the  very  form  of  expression,  "regenerating  unto 
God,"  which  he  particularly  applies  to  the  "great  com- 
mission" under  which  the  Apostles  were  to  disciple  all 
nations. 

Now  as  Justin  Martyr,  who  wrote  a  few  years  sooner 
than  Ireneus,  and  Clemens  Alexandrinus,  who  wrote  a 
few  years  later,  both  imply  baptism  in  their  use  of  the 
term  "regenerate,"*  and  this,  the  invariable  use  of  the 

""  Let  it  be  borne  in  mind  by  the  reader  that  these  Avriters,  in  their 
use  of  the  term  "regeneration,"  do  not  necessaril}'  teach  or  imply 
spiritual  change  of  nature.  Such  is  the  meaning  given  to  the  term 
by  many  modern  ■writers,  but  anciently  "  baptismal  regeneration''  im- 
plied chanc/e  of  state,  or  being  "  put  into  a  nezo  siate,"^  "  enrolled  in 
Christ,"  J  "  delivered  from  death  and  assigned  to  life,"  J  "  the  spiritual 
circumcision,"^  "  enlightening,"  &c. 

I  Onmes  eniin  venit  per  semet  ipsura  salvare :  Omnes,  inquani,  qui 
per  earn  ranascuntur  in  Deum  ;  infantes,  et  parvulos,  et  pueros  et 
juvencs  et  seniorcs.  Idco  per  oiunem  vcnit  ictatem  ;  et  infantibus 
inlans  factus,  sanctilicans  intkntes  :  in  parvulis  parvulus,  sanctificans 
banc  ipsam  habentes  aetsitam  ;  sinml  et  exemplum  illis  pietatis  eflec- 
tus,  etjustitia',  et  subjcctionis:  in  juvenibus  jiivcnis,  &c. 

*  Clomont  Alox.  tTortuUiaii.  +  Clomcnt  Horn.  §  Justin  Martyr. 


-67A.  Apos.]  practice  of  TIIK  CHUllCH.  87 

term  in  this  age, — Ireneus  himself,  in  other  portions  of 
his  writings,  using  it  in  the  same  sense,  and  particularly 
with  the  same  form  of  phraseology  which  he  has  here 
applied  to  Infants,  how  otherwise  can  we  suppose  he 
used  it  in  this  place  ?  In  Avhat  other  sense  can  Infants 
be  said  to  be  "regenerated  unto  God,"  under  the  "com- 
mission" of  the  Apostles? 

Various  methods  have  been  adopted  to  evade  the 
force  of  this  passage,  but  without  success.  Mr.  Gale 
labored,  perhaps,  more  than  any  other  man  to  that 
effect.  He  first  called  in  question  the  authenticity  of 
the  passage ;  then  cavilled  at  the  translation ;  then 
attempted  to  show  that  regeneration  did  not  mean 
baptism  in  that  place ;  and  lastly,  not  satisfied  with  his 
previous  efforts,  undertook  to  make  it  appear  that  Ire- 
neus did  not  probably  mean  Infants,  but  children  of 
some  ten  years  of  age  ! 

As  to  its  authenticity,  and  the  translation,  it  is  unne- 
cessary here  to  say  anything,  the  whole  literary  world 
acknowledges  its  authority.  On  the  use  of  the  word  "re- 
generate," he  mistook  the  meaning  of  Wall,  against  whom 
he  wrote,*  supposing  he  meant  to  say,  that  Ireneus  and 
others  only  used  "regenerate"  as  synonymous  with 
baptism.  Whereas,  Wall  says,  and  the  argument  drawn 
from  the  passage  is  based  on  the  same,  that  regenera- 
tion, when  applied  to  persons  in  regard  to  their  relation 
to  God,  was  either  used  interchangeably  with,  or  else 
always  included  baptism.  So  that  the  greater  portion 
of  Gale's  argument,  leaving  out  his  mistakes,  and  such 

*  See  Wall's  Defeuce. 


88  INFANT  BAPTISM.  [A.  Apos.  67- 

parts  as  have  no  bearing  on  the  question,  goes  to  sup- 
port the  above  use  of  the  term.  For  instance,  he  brings 
forward  a  passage  from  the  dialogue  of  Justin  with 
Trjpho,  which  sajs,  "  Christ  is  become  the  head  of  an- 
other people  who  are  regenerated  by  him  by  water,  faith, 
and  the  tree,"  [the  Cross.]  But  what  does  this  teach 
other  than  that  baptism  is  included  under  the  term  re- 
generated ?  Does  not  ''  regenerated  by  water,  faith, 
and  the  cross,"  mean  that  state  attained  when  baptized 
in  the  faith  of  the  Cross  ?  Again,  he  brings  forward 
another  passage,  which  runs  as  follows :  "  Him  that  is 
washed  with  the  laver  for  the  remission  of  sins  and  re- 
generation," &c.  What  does  this  mean,  but  simply 
baptism  for  the  remission  of  sins  and  regeneration  ?  And 
does  not  baptism  here  form  a  part,  or  is  it  not  implied, 
when  we  say  one  "  is  washed  with  the  laver  for  the  re- 
mission of  sins  and  regeneration  ?"  Nothing  can  be 
more  obvious.  Mr.  Whiston,  one  of  Mr.  Gale's  own 
party,  admits,  "  it  is  undeniable  that  the  word  regene- 
ration was  generally,  if  not  constantly,  used  with  rela- 
tion to  MDaptismal  regeneration'  at  this  time,  and  that 
Mr  Gale  does  not  make  it  appear  that  Ireneus  used  it 
in  a  different  sense  in  this  passage."  He  grants  that 
the  passage  refers  to  the  baptism  of  Infants,  and  takes 
up  Avith  the  suggestion  that  by  Infants  it  means  children 
large  enough  to  be  catechised. 

But  better  for  him  to  have  given  up  at  once  the 
whole  argument  against  Infant  baptism.  For  it  must 
be  obvious  to  every  reader  that  Ireneus  designed  par- 
ticularly to  specify  every  age,  from  birth  to  manhood — 
'^InfantSj  little  ones,  cJiildr en,  youth,  and  elder  persons.'' 


-67A.  Apos.]  PRACTICE  OF  THE  CHURCH.  ■  89 

Making  four  grades,  before  he  reaches  manhood.  And 
as  if  to  prevent  all  misconstruction  of  his  words,  draws 
a  distinction  between  Infants  and  little  ones.  Added  to 
this,  he  informs  us  that  the  Saviour  gave  an  example  of 
a  godly  life  to  the  other  ages,  but  snjs  nothing  on  this 
point  in  regard  to  the  Infants,  Avhich  shows  he  regarded 
them  as  too  young  to  imitate  example. 

Even  Neander,  to  whom  Baptists  so  frequently  ap- 
peal in  this  our  day,  admits  that  this  "  passage  points 
to  Infant  baptism."*  And  it  is  surprising  that  any  one 
should  dispute  it,  were  it  not  that,  considering  the  time 
during  which  Ireneus  lived,  his  character,  zeal  for  Apos- 
tolical usage,  and  means  of  knowing  certainljj  what  that 
usage  was,  all  give  to  his  testimony  a  power  that  dispels 
as  the  morning  mist  before  the  sun,  the  unauthorized, 
gloomy  surmise,  that  Infant  baptism  is  an  innovation 
on  Apostolic  usage ;  and  sheds  upon  it  a  light  that  shows 
its  foundation  to  be  firmly  seated  in  the  authority  of 
God,  and  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  its  chief  corner-stone. 

And  why  labor  so  much  to  evade  the  testimony  of 
Ireneus  in  this  place,  wdien  he  shows,  in  another  way, 
even  more  satisfactorily  than  the  full  force  of  his  words 
here  can  make  it,  that  Infant  baptism  had  been  the 
practice  of  the  Church  from  the  first  preaching  of  the 
Apostles  ? 

His  zeal  for  Apostolic  usage,  and  opposition  to  every 
thing  like  change  or  novelties  have  already  been  alluded 
to.  He  wrote  against  the  heretical  sects  that  had  sprung 
up  after  the  first  preaching  of  the  Apostles,  and  gave 

"'^  Church  Hiitor}',  vol.  i.  p.  108. 


90  INFANT  BAPTISM.  [A.  APo.s.  67— 

the  origin  and  history  of  each  one  in  its  turn,  from 
Simon,  the  Magician,  down  to  near  the  close  of  his  own 
life.  And  made  it  his  special  business  to  point  out 
the  peculiar  doctrines  of  each ;  to  collect  together  all 
their  tenets,  in  which  they  differed  from  the  Church ; 
and  to  show  wherein  they  differed  ;  and  the  superiority 
of  the  Church  over  them  all,  in  soundness  of  doctrine 
and  conformity  of  practice  to  the  usages  of  the  Apostles. 
These  are  his  words  on  this  point — "  Since  then  there  is 
manifold  evidence  agaiiist  all  the  sects:  and  that  my 
'purpose  is  to  confute  each  of  them  according  to  their 
several  tenets :  I  thinJc  it  lyroper  to  recount  from  lohat 
fountain  and  original  they  sprung.''  He  therefore 
made  it  his  business  to  expose  their  errors  and  trace 
them  to  their  sources.  And  began  with  the  first  sect 
tliat  arose  in  the  days  of  the  Apostles,  and  continued  his 
catalogue  several  years  beyond  the  time  at  which  Origen 
was  born.  "Who,  as  we  have  seen,  records  it  as  the  prac- 
tice in  his  day  to  baptize  Infants,  and  that  the  "usage 
was  handed  down  by  the  Apostles." 

Now  if  there  was  any  difference  in  opinion  or  in  prac- 
tice on  the  point  of  Infant  baptism,  between  these  sects 
and  the  Church,  (or  great  body  of  Christians)  he  would 
of  course  have  mentioned  it.  But  what  is  the  fact  ? 
He  begins  with  Simon,  the  Magician,  and  Menander  as 
the  first, — points  out  their  designs  and  errors.  Next 
takes  up  Saturninus  and  Basilides,  specifies  their  error. 
Then  Carpocratis  and  Cerinthus,  enters  into  their  pecu- 
liar doctrines.  And  so  on  with  the  Ebionites,  Nico- 
laitains,  Encratites,  Caians,  Marcionites,  Yalentinians, 
etc.. — down  to  between  80  and  90  years  after  the  Apos- 


-AP05.  Age.]  PRACTICE  OF  THE  CHURCH.  91 

ties.  (At  whicli  time  Ave  have  already  shown  that 
the  Church  every  where  baptized  young  children.)  He 
enumerates  their  different  tenets — shows  in  what  particu- 
lars they  differed  from  the  Church — and  so  far  as  bap- 
tism is  concerned,  speaks  of  some  who  used  no  baptism 
at  all — of  others  who  mixed  oil  and  water  together  and 
poured  it  on  the  head — of  others,  who  baptized  persons 
lately  dead  ;  and  of  the  addition  of  various  absurdities 
in  connection  with  baptism.  But  says  not  one  word  of 
the  rejection  or  adoption  of  Infant  baptism  as  the  pecu- 
liarity of  a  single  sect.  Although  he  enters  into  the 
minutia  of  their  practices  and  doctrines,  Infant  baptism 
as  a  point  of  difference  is  not  mentioned  in  a  single  case. 
Now  what  is  the  inevitable  inference  ?  Why,  that  they 
did  not  differ  from  the  Church,  on  this  point.  If  any  of 
them  had  differed  in  this  particular,  would  Ireneus  have 
noticed  such  things  as  the  above  and  passed  over  this  ? 
Who,  that  knows  anything  of  the  controversy  that  has 
continued  to  agitate  the  Church,  ever  since  the  Divine 
authority  of  Infant  baptism  was  first  called  in  question 
in  the  twelfth  century,  can  believe  its  introduction  would 
have  been  passed  over  unnoticed  in  an  age,  when  the  least 
deviation  of  opinion  or  of  practice  from  the  Church,  was 
called  heresy  ?  Or  who  that  observes  the  minutia  into 
which  Ireneus  enters  on  other  points,  can  for  a  moment 
entertain  the  thought  ?  What  then  ?  Why,  that  the 
Church  and  all  the  sects  that  baptized  at  all,  were 
agreed  in  the  baptism  of  the  young  children  of  Chris- 
tians— or  else  none  baptized  them.  But  that  it  was 
the  usage  of  the  Church,  at  the  time  when  Ireneus 
wrote,  to  baptize  Infants,  there  can  be  no  doubt.     Aside 


92  INFANT  BAPTISM.  [A.  Apos.  67- 

from  his  own  declaration,  Origen's  testimony  will  cer- 
tainly settle  that  point.  Ireneus  lived  to  be  a  very  old 
man  and  was  put  to  death  during  the  persecution  under 
Severus  near  the  close  of  the  second  century  ;*  and  had 
brought  his  history  down  some  years  beyond  the  birth 
of  Origen.  And  if  the  testimony  of  Origen,  the  most 
learned  and  pious  man  of  his  times^  can  not  be  relied  on, 
as  to  a  public  usage  in  his  childhood  and  youthful  days 
— then  all  that  is  past  must  remain  a  blank. 

Ireneus  compared  the  tenets  and  practices  of  the  va- 
rious sects  with  those  of  the  great  body  of  Christians 
who  adhered  to  the  same  communion  and  fellowship ; 
and  who  were  holding  fast,  as  they  believed,  to  the  doc- 
trines of  the  Apostles  ;  and  to  this  standard  measure  he  ■ 
brought  them  all ;  and  pointed  out  what  had  been  added 
to,  or  taken  from  "the  one  only  true  faith." 

Now  some  of  these  sects  had  sprung  up  before  the 
death  of  St.  John,  others  soon  after  and  during  different 
periods  in  the  second  century,  and  if  they  differed  not 
from  the  Church,  at  the  time  when  Ireneus  was  writing, 
in  the  baptism  of  Infants,  it  follows  that  they  baptized 
them  also ;  because  the  Church  at  that  time  we  know, 
did  baptize  them.  And  if  the  sects  that  arose  in  the 
Apostolic  age  baptized  Infants,  then  the  Apostles  did 
the  same,  as  there  was  no  difference  on  this  point  be- 
tween the  Apostles  and  those  who  baptized  at  all.  And 
that  the  followers  of  Simon  Magus,  and  Menandcr — 
the  Ebionites,  and  others  that  originated  in  the  Apostolic 
age  did  baptize,  their  disciples,  we  know  also,  on  the 

^  Milner,  p.  9G. 


-Apod.  A.iE.]  PRACTICE  OF  THE  CHURCH.  93 

authority  of  Ireneus  who  tells  us  that  Menander  bap- 
tized in  his  own  name,  and  that  the  Ebionites  practiced 
both  baptism  and  circumcision.  And  that  the  Valenti- 
nians,  Cerinthians  and  others  that  came  after,  baptized 
— one,  the  living  for  the  dead — the  other,  anointed  with 
oil  after  baptism — and  others  again  mixed  oil  with  the 
water  which  they  used,  etc.  And  as  he  recorded  things 
of  this  nature,  can  we  suppose  he  would  have  omitted 
the  rejection  of  Infant  baptism,  a  thing  of  vastly  more 
importance,  had  a  difference  on  that  point  existed? 

And  further,  since  there  was  no  difference  between 
them  and  the  great  body  of  Christians  down  to  the 
time,  when  Ireneus  closes  his  history,  is  not  the  conclu- 
sion inevitable,  that  the  Apostles,  the  baptizing  sects, 
and  the  primitive  Church  at  that  time,  all  practiced 
alike  in  that  particular,  and  hence  all  baptized  little 
children  ? 

Confirmatory  of  this  conclusion,  four  other  writers 
who  have  treated  on  the  same  subject,  all  of  whom 
lived  before  the  close  of  the  fourth  century,  and  have 
brought  their  history  of  the  different  sects  down  to 
their  own  times,  record  no  difference  of  this  kind. 
Epiphanius,  Philastrus,  Augustine  and  Theodoret  have 
each  in  their  turn  continued  this  parallel  till  it  comes 
down  long  beyond  the  time,  when  the  universality  of 
Infant  baptism  is  as  well  known,  as  the  existence  of  the 
Church  itself.  And  still  no  baptizing  sect  that  rejected 
Infant  baptism  is  named.  Thus  they  have  endorsed  the 
faithfulness  of  Ireneus  as  a  witness,  and  by  a  negative 
train  of  concurrent  testimony  corroborated  what  has 
been  proved  by  positive  and  circumstantial  evidence, — 


94  '        INFANT  BAPTISM.  [A.  Apos.  67- 

i.  c,  That  Infant  baptism  was  the  doctrine  and  usage  of 
the  Primitive  Church,  taught  and  '•'' handed  down  hy 
the  Apostles." 

As  some  persons  are  slow  to  comprehend  how  it  is, 
the  absence  of  controversy  can  ever  prove  the  existence 
and  unity  of  practice,  let  them  suppose  three  parallel 
columns — And  in  the  1st,  the  Church  under  the  Apostles ; 
in  the  2nd,  the  Church  after  the  Apostles  down  to  the 
close  of  the  second  century  ;  in  the  3rd,  the  doctrines  and 
practices  of  the  various  sects  during  both  periods.  Then 
select  one  who  was  born  and  had  grown  up  to  manhood 
among  those  who  had  been  eye-witnesses  of  the  doings  of 
Apostles,  and  had  been  trained  and  taught  by  a  disciple 
of  one  of  their  number  ;  and  let  him  mark  all  things  in 
each  column  that  diifered  from  either  of  the  other  two ; 
and  then  suppose  the  eye  to  pass  over  the  things  in  which 
they  diifered,  and  there  to  see  Infant  baptism  though 
only  implied  in  two  of  them,  is  written  in  specific  terms 
in  the  other,  and  yet  not  marJced  like  other  things  as  a 
point  of  difference  from  them ;  and  what  does  he  learn 
from  it  ?  Most  obviously  that  they  were  all  agreed  in 
that,  though  two  of  them  record  it  in  only  general 
terms.  Further,  let  four  others  in  the  next  and  succeed- 
ing centuries  review  the  same,  and  continue  the  parallel 
to  successive  periods,  until  it  comes  down  to  the  close  of 
the  fourth  century,  and  still  this  perfect  agreement  on 
this  point ;  when  the  practice  of  Infant  baptism  is  as 
common  and  well  known  as  the  public  worship  of  Chris- 
tians ;  and  when  its  specific  mention  lias  been  called 
forth  among  most  of  tlie  Sects  also  ;  and  then  read 
tike  declaration  of  a  pi'omincnt  Teaclier  that  he  "werer 


-Arcs.  Auk.]  PRACTICE  OF  THE  CHURCH.  95 

heard  of  even  an  impious  heretic  that  denied  baptism  to 
little  children  ;'''^  and 'vvhiit  is  tlic  conclusion?  More 
espcciiilly  when  drawn  in  view  of  what  Ireneus  teaches 
in  another  connection — "  Christ  came  to  save  all  per- 
sons by  himself :  all  who  are  by  himf  regenerated  (bap- 
tized) unto  God — Infants,  little  oyies,  and  children  and 
youths  and  elder  p)ersons  ?  " 

The  only  conclusion  that  can  be  legitimately  drawn, 
is,  that  the  Church,  during  the  time  of  and  after  the 
Apostles,  down  to  the  period  when  Ireneus  Avas  writing, 
and  the  baptizing  sects  of  the  same  age,  were  all  agreed 
as  to  the  practice  of  Infant  baptism.  That  it  is  implied 
in  the  record  of  the  teaching  and  practice  of  the  Apos- 
tles, was  adopted  by  the  baptizing  sects,  and  continued 
in  the  primitive  Church.  And  like  many  other  things 
referred  to  in  only  general  terms,  until  circumstances 
called  forth  its  special  notice. 

That  ''  Infants,  little  ones,  and  children,  and  youths, 
and  elder  persons,"  embrace  all  ages  in  the  above  pas- 
sage, there  can  be  no  doubt.  And  for  the  use  of  the 
term  '' regeneration"  for  baptism  by  Ireneus  and  his 
cotemporaries,  they  refer  to  both  Christ  and  St.  Paul 
for  their  authority  in  such  use  and  teaching.  (See  John 
iii.  5,  Titus  iii.  5.)  Thus  taking  us  to  the  fountain 
head — the  Holy  Scriptures. 

Wherefore,  with  others,  the  venerated  Ireneus,  Avho 
was  taught  by  the  disciple  and  personal  friend  of  St. 
John,  and  who  in  his  latter  days  said  that  he  remem- 
bered what   his   teacher,  Polycarp,  said  and  did  better 

*  Pelagius. 

f  Per  eum  renascuntnr,  not  per  semot  ipsum  ronascuntur. 


96  INFANT  BAPTISM.  [A.  Apos.  (57- 

tban  the  occurreDces  of  the  then  present  period,*  and 
who  TV  as  as  anxious  to  adhere  to  "  the  only  true  faith" 
as  his  teacher,  testifies  to  the  Divine  authority  of  Infant 
baptism  in  two  ways — first,  to  the  baptism  of  all  ages ; 
second,  that  there  was  no  difference  between  the  Apos- 
tles, the  baptizing  sects,  and  the  primitive  Church  in 
their  practice  on  this  point,  which  is  confirmed  by  four 
other  writers. 

We  pass  on  to  another,  born  about  the  close  of  the 
Apostolic  age. 

*  Euseb.  lib.  v.  20. 


CHAPTER  TV. 


TESTIMONY   HISTORICAL   AND  CIRCUMSTANTIAL. 

Testimony  of  Justin  Martyr,  born  at  the  close  of  the  Apostolic  age,  in  the 
midst  of  Christians — Many  baptized  in  childhood — Gentile  Christians 
received  circumcision  in  baptism — Interpretation  of  Col.  ii.  11,  12 — 
Clemens  Romanus — All  ages  corrupt,  and  remedy  provided  before  born, 
or  necessity  of  putting  all  into  a  new  state — Hermas — Necessity  of  bap- 
tism to  all — Infants,  and  those  who  continue  Infants  without  malice, 
most  honorable  of  all — Interpretation  of  St.  John  iii.  5 — Christian 
Church  orgiinized  before  New  Testament  written — Infant  Baptism  before 
New  Testament  canon  settled — Universal  in  the  next  age  after  the 
Apostles — Improbability  of  so  notable  an  innovation  without  opposition 
in  that  period — The  adherence  to  "  the  one  only  faith"  by  Polycarp, 
Irencus  and  Christians  immediately  succeeding  the  Apostles — Summary 
of  historical  and  circumstantial  evidence. 

Justin,  the  martyr,  whose  memory  is  held  sacred  by 
every  Christian  that  knows  anything  of  his  history,  and 
who  suffered  martyrdom  in  defence  of  the  Gospel  under 
Marcus  Antoninus,  was  born  in  the  midst  of  Christians 
at  Neapolis,  in  Samaria,  and  wrote  about  forty  years 
after  the  close  of  the  Apostolic  age.  In  an  apology 
addressed  to  Antoninus  Pius,  in  behalf  of  Christians,  he 
speaks  of  aged  persons,  then  living,  who  were  made  dis- 
ciples to  Christ  from  their  childhood.  The  enemies  of 
Christianity  had  accused  Christians  of  teaching  doc- 
trines and  indulging  in  practices  corrupting  and  perni- 
cious in  their  tendency.  This,  in  the  course  of  his 
apology,  he  denies,  and  says : 
9 


98  INFANT  BAPTISM.  [A.  Aros.  40 

"  There  are  many  persons  among  us,  of  both  sexes,  of  sixty  and 
seventy  years  of  age,  who  were  made  disciples  to  Christ  from 
tlieir  childhood,  that  continue  uncorrupt."* — Jl'stin.  Apol.  ii. 
p.- 02. 

From  this  passage  it  appears  that  there  were  then 
living  many  Christians  who  w^ere  baptized  about  the 
middle  of  the  Apostolic  age  in  their  childhood.  For 
the  Apostles  commenced  the  preaching  of  the  Gospel  in 
the  year  33  or  34.  St.  John  died  in  102,  A.  D.,  and 
seventy  years  from  the  time  Justin  was  writing,  would 
carry  him  back  about  half  way  between  the  death  of  St. 
John  and  first  preaching  of  St.  Peter,  which  would  be 
about  the  middle  of  the  Apostolic  age,  and  thirty  years 
beyond  the  limits  assigned  to  our  inquiry. 

Various  other  passages  might  be  cited  from  his  writ- 
ings, from  which  the  baptism  of  Infants  may  be  deduced 
by  inference.  His  doctrine  of  original  sin — explanation 
of  regeneration, — and  comparison  of  baptism  to  circum- 
cision— all  show  that  he  believed  in  the  necessity  of  In- 
fant baptism. 

The  term  used  in  the  above  extract  for  "  childhood  " 
(rtatScou)  is  the  same  which  St.  Matthew  applies  to  little 
children  under  two  years  of  age,  (chap.  ii.  16,)  whom 
Ilcrod  had  ordered  to  be  slain.  It  is  a  term  which  em- 
braces the  general  class  of  childhood — extending  from 
Infancy  upward,  as  far  as  comes  within  the  range  of  chil- 
dren incapable  of  managing  for  themselves.  Justin 
says,  there  were  ''^many  of  both  sexes,'"  {no-K-koi,  tiv^i  Ttoxxat) 
and  therefore  he  employed  a  term  which  included  little 

*  "  Kat  Tto'hXoi  tivs^  x(xv  TiaXXai  t^-f^pxautovtao  xa.i  s68o[xyjxoytovtaii 
06  fx  rtaiBuiv  ifxaOritivOrjiiap  rw  ;^pt-s-rw,  a4)6'opoc  bcafiepovai' 


TO  MID.  Apos.  Age.]      PRACTICE  OF  THE  CHURCH.  99 

children  of  all  ages.  Of  these,  some  were  older  and 
others  younger ;  and  had  he  adopted  a  term  which  was 
confined  to  the  youngest  age  alone,  he  would  not  have 
expressed  the  idea  which  he  wished  to  convey. 

Hence,  the  objection  sometimes  made  by  Antipedo- 
baptists — that  he  did  not  employ  a  term  confined  to  In- 
fants only,  instead  of  strengthening  their  cause,  tends 
to  make  it  weaker — for  it  shows  that  children  of  difi'er- 
ent  ages,  and  in  large  numbers  were  taken  into  the 
Church  in  the  Apostolic  age,  as  they  were  afterwards, 
and  are  at  the  present  day.  He  knew  many  who  were 
made  disciples  to  Christ  in  childhood,  thirty  years  before 
the  death  of  St.  John  ;  and  while  St.  Luke,  and  Thomas, 
and  Jude,  and  Timothy,  and  Titus,  were  all  then 
alive.  And  he  uses  a  term  for  their  difi'erent  ages,  appli- 
cable to  the  youngest  Infants,  as  well  as  to  those  further 
advanced,  so  as  to  include  all  who  were  then  made  dis- 
ciples in  their  childhood  ;  that  is,  baptized.  For  there 
is  no  other  way  in  which  little  children  can  be  "  made 
disciples  to  Christ,"  but  by  baptism. 

The  attempt  to  evade  their  baptism  as  some  Antipedo- 
baptists  have  done,""  by  supposing  {iiua9r^t£v9ri6av,)  "were 
made  disciples"  in  that  place,  means  only  a  state  of  train- 
ing for  disciples,  is  equally  unfortunate  for  their  cause 
with  their  objection  to  the  term  supposed  to  express  the 
various  stages  of  childhood.  For  Justin  was  writing  in 
defence  of  the  members  of  the  Christian  Church.  He 
was  advocating  the  purity  of  those  witJiin  the  pale  of 
the  Church,  not  of  those  without.  And  his  object  was  to 
show  that  the  doctrines  and  practices  of  Christians  were 

^  Gales'  "Reflections. 


100  '  INFANT  BAPTISM.  [A.  Apos.  40- 

beneficial  to  those  who  had  been  under  their  influence, 
and  trained  up  in  the  Church  from  their  earliest  child- 
hood. How  could  he  as  an  honest  man,  say  that  people 
had  been  made  disciples  to  Christ,  when  only  put  into  a 
state  of  training  for  his  disciples  ?  Do  Baptists  con- 
sider their  Sunday-school  children  who  have  not  been 
baptized,  and  others  too  young  to  attend  the  Sunday- 
school,  whom  they  profess  to  be  training,  as  already  dis- 
ciples of  Christ  ?  Do  they  speak  of  them  as  such — or 
would  they  in  a  written  defence  of  the  members  of  their 
Church,  include  such  under  the  term  of  disciples  or  mem- 
bers f  No — they  tell  us  that  they  hold  the  membership 
of  little  children  in  utter  abhorrence. 

And  we  know  that  no  such  forms  of  speech  are  to  be 
found  in  any  of  their  writings.  And  we  find  no  such 
perversion  of  language  among  the  friends  of  Infant  bap- 
tism, as  that  of  the  '^  discipleship''  or  membership  of 
Christ's  Church,  to  mean  only  their  '^training  up" 
for  it. 

The  obvious  design  of  Justin  was  to  refute  the  slan- 
ders charged  upon  Christians,  by  appealing  to  the  lives 
of  many  who  were  then  old  men  and  women  among 
them,  that  had  been  made  disciples,  and  brought  under 
the  influence  of  their  doctrines  from  early  childhood. 
And  as  President  D wight  justly  remarks,  ''  there  never 
was  any  other  mode  of  making  disciples  from  childhood, 
except  by  baptism." 

The  term  sixaey^teveriaav — "were  made  disciples" — is  a 
part  of  the  same  verb  used  in  the  commission  given  to 
the  Apostles  to  "disciple  all  nations,  baptizing  them," 
&c.,  (Matt,  xxviii.  19,)  and  is  from  the  root  of  the  same 


■ju  MID.  APU3.  Age.]      practice  of  THE  CHURCH.  101 

ivord  used  every ivhere  in  the  New  Testament  for  "  dis- 
ciples." Acts  ix.  26.  "And  when  Saul  was  come  to 
Jerusalem,  he  essayed  to  join  himself  to  the  ^  disciples,' 
{jio.dritaii)  but  they  were  all  afraid  of  him,  and  believed 
not  that  he  was  a  'disciple,'  {jiaOritrii'.)  Disciples 
(jxaOr^tai)  are  also  called  Christians,  (;xpt5-r'cavor5.)  Acts  xi. 
26.  "The  disciples  were  first  called  Christians  at  An- 
tioch."  Previous  to  this  time  they  vfere  mostly  called 
disciples — now,  they  began  to  be  called  Christians. 

We  thus  learn  the  meaning  of  this  term,  both  from 
use  and  etymology.  Ma^j^i^fj  means  a  "disciple,"  and 
fxaerjtvisv  ^'to  disciplc."  "Disciples"  were  called  "Chris- 
tians," and  Justin  was  writing  in  defence  of  Christians, 
and  referred  to  those  that  had  been  made  disciples  from 
childhood — members  of  the  Church.  For  unless  he  re- 
ferred to  the  members  of  the  Christian  body — the 
Church — it  would  not  have  been  a  defence  of  Christians. 
And  to  be  a  member  of  that  body  one  must  be  baptized. 
Therefore  their  disciples  were  baptized,  and  had  been 
trained  and  nourished  by  Christian  doctrine  from  their 
childhood. 

And  that  such  is  the  meaning  and  teaching  of  Justin 
is  obvious  from  what  he  says  of  the  relation  of  baptism 
to  circumcision.  For  he  tells  us  that  baptism,  under 
the  new  dispensation,  holds  the  place  of  circumcision 
under  the  old.  And  as  circumcision  was  always  given 
to  little  children,  baptism,  having  now  superseded  it, 
must  of  course  be  given  to  little  children  also,  no  excep- 
tion having  been  made  in  their  case. 

The  following  passages  will  show  in  what  connection 
he  regarded  these  two  rites : 


102  INFANT  BAPTISM.  [A.  Apos.  40- 

"We  (Gentile  Christians)  also,  who,  through  him,  have  had 
access  to  God,  have  not  received  that  circumcision  which  is  ac- 
cording to  the  flesh,  but  that  which  is  spiritual,  which  Enoch 
and  those  like  him  had.  And  w^e  have  received  it  by  Baptism, 
through  the  mercy  of  God,  for  we  Avere  indeed  sinners  ;  and  it  is 
enjoined  on  all  to  receive  it  in  the  same  way."* — Dialog.  Cum 
Trypho.  p.  59. 

,  "  Gentile   Christians"  received  this  circumcision  by 

^  Baptism !  This  ancient  Father  and  Martyr  for  the 
cause  of  Christ,  writing  only  forty  years  after  the  Apos- 
tolic age,  informs  us  that  Christians  now  have  secured 
to  them  by  baptism  the  spiritual  blessings  and  promises 
symbolized  and  conveyed  under  the  rite  of  circum- 
cision. And  that  all  persons  are  enjoined  to  receive 
them  in  the  same  way. 

Again,  in  the  Quoest.  ad  Orthodox,  ascribed  to  Jus- 
tin, it  is  written,  ''  Quest.  Why,  if  circumcision  be  a 
good  thing,  we  (Gentiles)  do  not  use  it  as  vfell  as  the 
f  Jews  ?  Ans.  We  are  circumcised  by  baptism — by 
Christ's  circumcision."  Col.  ii.  11,  12.  "In  whom 
also  ye  are  circumcised  with  circumcision  made  without 
hands,  in  putting  off  the  body  of  the  sins  of  the  flesh 
by  the  circumcision  of  Christ;  buried  with  him  by 
baptism,"  etc. 

Not  only  is  Baptism  here  called  "  Christ's  circum- 
cision," which  Christians  receive  instead  of  the  "circum- 
cision of  the  flesh,"  but  the  words  of  the  Apostle  Paul 

*  Kat,  »7jti£t$  90  6ia  "tovrov   Ttpoxcopi^ciavtsi  tui   ©tw,  av  to-vtiqv  ifrjv 

xa-ta.  sapxa  ?tap£Xa/3o|U»;ji/  Tttpctofir^v,  aVKa,  TivBVfio.'tLxriVf  r.v   'E.vi^x  ^^^ 

ot  ofioiov  £<J)DXa|av.    ^i^ixsl^  8e  6ia  |3a7tT'£'S(UaT'o5  avtrjVi  STtadav  a/xapt&Xov 

ysysvBifjLsv  bia  'to  £7.fOj  io  Ttapa  'tov  &bov  €-7<.a^ojXEV  xat  Ttttfftv  t^Etov 


TO  MID.  AP03.  Age.]      PRACTICE  OF  THE  CHURCH.  103 

are  appealed  to  as  authority  for  such  use  and  teaching. 
And  such  was  the  generally  received  doctrine  of  the 
ancient  Fathers  of  the  Church,  as  we  shall  presently 
show.  Hence  a  three-fold  cord  of  proof  for  the  Apos- 
tolic practice  of  Infant  baptism.  One,  that  "many 
were  baptized  in  childhood,"  in  the  middle  of  the  Apos- 
tolic age.  Another,  that  Baptism  has  taken  the  place 
of  Circumcision  under  the  Christian  Dispensation.  A 
third,  that  such  was  the  common  doctrine  of  the  early 
Fathers,  and  the  generally  received  interpretation  of  the 
Written  Word. 

Further,  original  sin  and  the  corrupt  nature  of  every 
one  horn  into  the  luorld,  which  they  supposed  to  be  the 
ground  or  chief  reason  why  the  baptism  of  infants  was 
given  by  the  Apostles,  is  much  dwelt  upon  by  the  early 
Fathers ;  and  the  necessity  of  baptism  enforced  often- 
times, when  they  do  not  enter  into  detail^  in  regard  to 
the  subjects  of  baptism.  For  instance — Clemens  Ro- 
manus,  who  lived  and  wrote  in  the  Apostolic  age,  in  his 
Epistle  to  the  Corinthians,  referring  to  Job's  words, 
chapter  14 — writes  : 

''There  is  none  free  from  pollution,  no,  though  his  life  be  but 
the  length  of  one  day^ 

In  another  place  he  quotes  Ps.  li.  5, 

"  I  was  shapen  in  iniquity  and  in  sin  did  my  mother  conceive 
me." 

Thus  showing  the  corrupt  nature  of  infants,  as  well  as 
of  others,  and  also  adds  : 

"  He  that  formed  and  made  us,  brought  us  into  this  world, 
having  prepared  for  us  his  benefits  before  we  were  born." — 
Clemens  Romanus,  Epist.  ad  Corinthios,  c.  38. 


104  INFANT  BAPTISM.  [Apos.  Agk^ 

He  evidently  means  all  ages  are  corrupt,  and  all  need 
tlie  benefits  provided  for  them,  to  "put  them  into  a 
new  state,''  i.  e.,  baptism. 

Hermas,  who  lived  and  wrote  at  the  same  time,  (during 
the  Apostolic  age,)  speaks  of  the  necessity  of  baptism  to 
every  one,  and  calls  it  a  "  seaV     He  says  : 

"  The  seal  of  the  Son  of  God  is  necessary  for  every  one  to  enter 
into  the  kingdom  of  Heaven/'  and  "that  seal  is  baptism."* 

Again : 

"Whosoever  shall  continue  as  infants  without  malice,  shall  be 
more  honorable  than  all  those  of  whom  I  have  spoken.  For  all 
infants  are  valued  by  our  Lord  and  esteemed  first  of  all." — Her- 
mas, LIB.  3,  SIMIL.  9,  c.  16. 

By  which  he  shows  how  7ie  understood  the  words  and 
actions  of  our  Saviour  in  regard  to  little  children.  And 
adds — those  who  shall  continue  as  Infants,  without 
malice,  w^ill  be  esteemed  the  most  honorable  of  all.  And 
what  he  says  in  reference  to  the  necessity  of  baptism  to 
every  one,  is  in  accordance  with  the  Ancient  Interior eta- 
tion  of  the  words  of  the  Saviour  to  Nicodemus,  John  iii. 
5.  The  English  translation  reads,  "  Except  a  man  be 
born  of  water  and  of  the  Spirit,  he  cannot  enter  into 
the  kingdom  of  God.  The  original  is  (mj^yu^  rt?)  "  unless 
any  one  be  born,"  &c.  Wall  says :  "  Our  Saviour's 
words  to  Nicodemus  do  so  stand  in  the  original,  and  are 
so  understood  by  all  the  Ancients,  as  to  include  all  2^er- 
sons,  men,  women  and  children.' 'f 

Therefore  the  teaching  of  these  men  of  Apostolic  times, 
the  interpret ation  of  the  words  of  our  Saviour  by  primi- 

*  i.  e.,  generally  necessary.  f  Wall's  Hist.  Inf.  Bap. 


ap.  a«e.]  before  neav  testament  canon  settled.       105 

tive  Christians^  show  that  they  understood  baptism  to  be 
necessary  to  all — to  every  one — io.v  /xt^  rtj,  any  one.  Not 
necessary  in  that  absolute  sense  that  knows  no  excep- 
tion, but  as  a  law  that  binds  all,  and  cannot  be  laid  aside 
by  men. 

Both  of  these  writers  lived  and  wrote  whilst  inspired 
Apostles  were  still  on  the  earth,  and  their  writings  were 
reckoned  by  many  for  hooks  of  the  Holy  Scriptures,  and 
read  in  many  of  the  Churches  as  such ;  according  to 
Eusebius.* 

Thus,  before  the  canon  of  the  New  Testament  had 
been  settled.  Practice,  Doctrine  and  the  received  In- 
terpretation of  the  words  of  Christ,  and  of  his  Apostles, 
ALL  unite  in  corroborating  the  Divine  authority  of  the 
Baptism  of  Infants. 

And  had  any  doctrine  been  advocated  in  the  first  ages 
of  the  Church,  militating  directly  or  indirectly  against 
it,  much  more,  doubtless,  would  have  been  written  con- 
cernincr  it.     But  errors  of  other  kinds  arose  in  those 

o 

days  to  occupy  the  attention  of  the  Church.  Such  as 
the  Divinity  of  Christ,  Original  Sin,  the  various  forms 
of  Gnosticism,  &c.  When,  however,  any  question  did 
arise  affecting  or  calling  forth  any  allusion  to  Infant 
baptism,  we  find  it  mentioned  or  alluded  to  as  often  as 
any  other  well-known  and  established  rite  should  be, 
under  similar  circumstances ;  and  its  authority  never 
questioned — no  never. f 

Again,  it  is  a  fact  not  known,  perhaps,  to  some  who 

*  Eccl.  His.  lib.  3.  c.  3. 

j-  It  is  unnecessary  to  repeat  here  tlie  proof  that  Tertullian  did  not 
deny  the  authority  of  Infant  Baptism,  but  only  advised  its  delay  ex- 
cept in  certain  cases. 


106  INFANT  BAPTISM  BEFORE     '  * 

oppose  Infant  baptism,  that  the  same  authority  which 
settled  and  handed  down  the  New  Testament  canon,  did 
at  the  same  time  practice  and  hand  down  the  baptism  of 
little  children.  In  other  words,  the  Primitive  Church 
at  the  time  it  was  determining  what  books  should  be  re- 
ceived as  its  rule  of  faith,  or  the  men  who  acted  a  con- 
spicuous part  in  the  settlement  of  that  question,  .recog- 
nized Infant  baptism  as  the  authoritative  teaching  of  those 
Scriptures  which  they  received.  For  that  the  baptism 
of  little  children, was  the  settled  practice  of  the  Church, 
before  the  New  Testament  canon  was  a  settled  question, 
is  beyond  all  controversy.  This  no  student  of  Eccle- 
siastical Literature  will  deny. 

Let  us  enter  a  little  into  detail.  We  know  that  the 
Christian  Church  was  founded  before  the  books  of  the 
New  Testament  were  written.  And  that  it  had  been 
planted  in  places  wide  and  far  apart,  before  important 
portions  of  that  canon  had  been  committed  to  paper.* 
We  know  also,  that  these  wTitings  were  sent,  some  of 
them  to  the  Church  in  one  place,  and  some  of  them  to 
it  in  another.  They  were  not  deposited  in  the  same 
congregation,  or  in  the  same  city.  But  written  at  dif- 
ferent times,  by  different  men,  in  different  places,  and 
sent  to  different  portions  of  the  world.  During  the 
same  time,  and  soon  after.  Epistles  and  WTitings  were 
circulated  from  pens  that  were  not  inspired.  Some  of 
these  bore  the  genuine  names  of  their  authors,  others 
were  spurious  and  ascribed  to  Apostles  and  writers  who 
never  saAv  them. 

*  See  dates  of  the  Epistles,  and  the  opinions  of  Home  and  otlicr 
learned  men  on  the  sn])ject 


SETTLEMENT  OF  NEW  TESTAMENT  CANON.  107 

Of  course  the  good  must  be  selected  from  the  bad, 
and  the  manuscripts  or  copies  from  all  these  points,  col- 
lected together  and  decided  upon  by  competent  author- 
ity, before  the  canon  of  the  New  Testament  could  be 
closed.     This  was  a  work  of  time  and  great  care. 

Many  Christians  have  fallen  into  the  mistake  of  sup- 
posing that  the  New  Testament  was  given  to  us  as  a 
Constitution,  |)resc'r^7>^«^  the  organization  and  order  of 
the  Christian  Church.  But  not  so.  The  Church  was 
organized,  or  had  passed  into  the  Christian  Dispensation 
before  any  fart  of  the  New  Testament  was  written. 
And  instead  of  minute  directions  and  specifications  on 
every  point,  many  things  are  taken  for  granted,  and  only 
so  much  committed  to  writing  and  deposited  among  the 
faithful,  as  was  deemed  necessary  by  the  Head  of  all,  to 
preserve  and  jj'er/ec^  what  was  already  begun.  All  the 
essential  doctrines  of  salvation,  and  whatever  was  re- 
quisite for  the  defence  of  the  Church  against  the 
"Gates  of  Hell,"  and  to  secure  its  success  in  the  earth, 
were  committed  to  its  care  and  keeping,  in  a  Way  that 
should  be  handed  down  to  the  latest  posterity.  Much, 
therefore,  is  implied^  that  would  require  express  precept 
in  a  formal  Constitution. 

The  Holy  Scriptures  contain  the  words  of  eternal  life, 
and  make  up  the  standard  of  our  faith  and  practice. 
They  are  the  touchstone  to  which  everything  7ieio  must 
be  brought,  and  to  which  everything  must  conform.  But 
before  the  different  writings  that  compose  the  New  Test- 
ament had  been  collected  together,  and  the  present  canon 
adopted,  by  reference  to  the  early  Christian  writers, 
we  find  that  Infant  Baptism  was  beyond  doubt  the  estab- 


108  SETTLEMENT  OF  NEW  TESTAMENT  CANON, 

lished  usage  of  the  Church,  and  received  as  the  doctrine 
and  practice  of  the  Apostles. 

Origen,  who  acted  a  very  important  part  in  sifting  out 
and  testing  the  authority  of  the  various  manuscripts, 
gives  us  the  first  regular  Catalogue^  of  all  the  books  of 
the  New  Testament* — and  who  by  reading,  travel,  and 
a  lon'g  residence  in  Palestine,  enjoyed  many  advantages 
to  be  well  informed  in  regard  to  the  received  doctrines 
and  public  rites  of  the  various  portions  of  the  Christian 
Church,  tells  us  : — "  The  usage  of  the  Church  in  baptiz- 
ing little  children  was  handed  doivnfrom  the  Ajjostles." 

And  if  he  is  high  authority  in  regard  to  the  canon  of 
the  Holy  Scriptures,  why  not  in  regard  to  a  received 
doctrine  and  public  rite  of  the  Church  at  the  same  time? 
If  he  was  competent  to  judge  of  and  aid  in  the  decision 
of  the  external  and  internal  evidences  of  the  different 
books  of  the  New  Testament,  should  we  not  conclude 
that  he  ought  to  know  whether  Infant  baptism  was  in- 
consistent w^ith  their  teaching  ? 

Among  those,  before  him,  who  are  cited  as  authority, 
and  who  were  instrumental  in  establishing  the  claims  of 
no  small  portion  of  the  Inspired  Writings — the  nwst 
pro7ninent  of  the7n,  have  referred  in  their  writings  to  the 
usage  of  Infant  baptism.  We  have  seen  that  Justin,  who 
wrote  only  forty  years  after  the  death  of  St.  John  ;  and 
Ireneus  who  filled  up  the  gap  between  St.  John  and 
Origen,  and  likewise  TertuUian  confirm  the  same  usage. 

And  of  those  who  came  after  him,  and  among  whom 
full  catalogues  became  numerous,  the  brightest  lights  of 

*  Even  he  omitted  St.  James  and  Jude,  but  quotes  them  in  othei* 
places. — See  Home  and  Dr.  Lardner. 


NEW    TESTAMENT    CANON.  100 

their  day,  have  also  left  their  undoubted  testimony  to  the 
authority  and  universality  of  Infant  baptism.  See  Jerome 
and  Augustine  among  others.  But  in  the  time  of  Origen, 
the  canon  of  the  New  Testament  may  be  regarded  as 
virtually  settled,  although  doubts  and  differences  of 
opinion  at  times  prevailed  in  portions  of  the  Church, 
respecting  some  of  the  books  received,  and  others  re- 
jected, which  were  not  finally  put  to  rest  till  the  Council 
of  Laodicea.'^ 

There  are  undoubtedly  internal  as  well  as  external 
evidences  of  the  Divine  authority  of  the  New  Testament. 
But  these  are  not  all  evident  to  the  Christian  reader  of 
the  present  day,  and  hence  our  indebtedness  to  the  prim- 
itive Church  for  settling  the  authenticity  of  these  books; 
and  we  now  receive  them  as  the  genuine  works  of  their 
authors  chiefly  because  they  have  been  handed  down  to 
us  by  the  Church  from  its  purest  days,  and  when  it  en- 
joyed advantages  which  we  do  not,  for  so  important  a 
decision.  We  have  still  means  and  tests  however,  by 
which  we  can  verify  much  that  was  then  done  for  us,  but 
in  the  rejection  of  some  books,  and  the  reception  of 
others,  we  should  find  ourselves  quite  unable,  at  the 
present  day,  to  make  a  satisfactory  decision  without  the 
aid  of  primitive  Christians.  For  instance,  what  is  there 
in  the  character  and  style  of  the  Epistles  of  Clement 
and  Barnabas,  which  were  read  as  authoritative  writings 
in  some  of  the  Churches  for  a  time,  by  which  we  could 
determine  ih^j  are  of  less  authority  than  the  Epistles 

■"  For  a  full  exposition  of  the  question  of  the  genuineness  and 
authenticity  of  the  New  Testament  the  reader  is  referred  to  Horno 
and  Lardner. 

10 


no  PKINCIPLES    OP    SETTLING    THE 

of  St.  John  or  that  of  St.  James?  Yet  we  reject  the 
former  and  receive  the  latter.  Why  ?  not  upon  the 
authority  of  our  own  independent  investigation  alone, 
but  by  the  aid  and  decision  of  the  primitive  Church,  or 
competent  authority  in  that  Church. 

And  shall  we  admit  that  the  authority  which  was  able 
to  decide  between  the  genuine  and  spurious  books  first 
read  in  the  Churches,  was  incompetent  to  decide  at  the 
same  time  whether  Infant  baptism  was  of  Apostolic 
origin  ?  Will  we  as  Christians  consent  that  before  the 
New  Testament  Canon  was  settled  as  the  law  and  rule 
of  faith  in  the  Christian  Church,  one  of  its  most  pub- 
lic and  important  rites  was  perverted  and  applied  to  a 
class  of  people  never  intended  ?  And  that  there  was 
not  w^isdom  enough  in  the  Church  to  detect  this  error, 
and  hence  it  was  practiced  and  handed  down  by  the 
very  authority  that  handed  down  the  Scriptures  ?  An 
error  too  that  prevailed  every vv here  for  a  long  period, 
and  deprived  the  great  body  of  the  Church  for  many 
generations  of  valid  baptism !  For  the  great  majority 
of  the  oldest  Churches  for  centuries  had  none  others 
than  members  baptized  in  infancy,  except  an  occasional 
isolated  case.  And  this,  the  Church  established  by  in- 
spired Apostles,  to  be  "  committed  to  faithful  men  who 
shall  be  able  to  teach  others"  also?  And  concerning 
which  the  Saviour  said  the  "  Gates  of  Hell  shall  not 
prevail  against  it" — and  to  its  founders  made  also  the 
promise,  "  Lo,  I  am  with  you  alway,  even  u»to  the  end  of 
the  world  ?"  Yet  before  the  next  generation  had  passed 
away — aye,  whilst  the  persons  and  teaching  of  several 
of  its  founders  were  fresh  in  the  memories  of  many,  its 


NEW  TESTAMENT  CANON.  Ill 

most  public  and  well  known  ordinance  was  by  universal 
consent  perverted,  and  the  foundation  of  the  whole  struc- 
ture sapped !  "  Tell  it  not  in  Gath,  publish  it  not  in 
the  streets  of  Askelon" — lest  the  enemy  of  our  holy 
religion  triumph  over  us  ! 

If  before  one  generation  after  the  Apostles  had  passed 
away,  our  religion  became  fundamentally  corrupt^  and 
there  was  neither  the  ability  to  detect  nor  the  spirit  to 
oppose  the  error,  what  confidence  can  we  have  in  it  now  ? 
What  new  power  has  been  communicated  to  the  present 
age,  that  was  not  then  given  ?  If  we  admit  the  Church 
to  have  been  so  corrupt  and  ignorant  in  the  beginning, 
how  shall  Ave  defend  it  against  the  attacks  of  Infidelity  ? 
Or  if  we  admit  that  the  writings  of  the  Fathers  have 
been  so  much  interpolated,  and  so  much  fraud  practiced 
in  the  name  of  the  primitive  Church,  that,  after  all  efforts 
to  separate  the  genuine  from  the  spurious,  no  reliance 
can  be  placed  in  their  testimony,  how  shall  we  defend 
the  authenticity  and  purity  of  the  Holy  Scriptures  ? 
Can  we  lay  aside  all  antiquity  and  prove  that  a  single 
book  in  the  New  Testament  was  written  by  its  reputed 
author,  or  that  every  book  has  not  been  corrupted  since, 
and  its  teachings  altered  ?  No — we  must  receive  the  aid 
of  such  testimony,  or  the  key  of  the  arch  remains  loose, 
and  the  whole  structure  will  fall.  Not  that  we  are  de- 
pendent upon  it  exclusively,  but  as  important  testimony 
to  be  cautiously  received  in  confirmation  of  the  high 
claims  of  the  Gospel  of  Christ.  It  is  not  by  one  train 
of  proof,  or  a  single  argument,  that  the  Divine  authority 
of  Christianity  can  be  sustained  at  the  present  time  : 
there  are  opposing  reasons  and  difficulties  that  are  sufii 


112  NEW  TESTAMENT  CANON. 

cient  to  annul  the  force  or  hold  in  abeyance  any  one  kind 
of  proofs  unless  corroborated  and  supported  by  others. 
!N either  the  internal  evidence  alone,  nor  the  historical^ 
nor  the  fulfillment  of  j^rophec^/,  nor  miracles,  nor  any 
other  independent  proof  of  itself,  would  overcome  all 
the  objections  of  the  natural  heart.  But  these  all  united 
and  corroborating  each  other — interwoven  by  a  thousand 
circumstances  and  all  pointing  to  the  same  great  truths, 
entrench  our  common  Christianity  within  a  bulwark  that 
all  the  battering  rams  of  an  infidel  world  can  never 
shake,  to  the  end  of  time.  And  in  this  magnificent 
structure,  the  aid  of  the  primitive  Church  and  the  testi- 
mony of  the  ear]y  Christian  Fathers  form  a  part — the 
whole  would  not  be  complete  without  them. 

If  primitive  Christians  could  testify  to  the  genuineness 
of  a  manuscript  read  in  the  Churches,  they  could  testify 
to  the  practice  of  a  public  rite  in  the  sam.e  Churches. 
And  if  we  receive  their  testimony  in  regard  to  some  of 
the  Churches,  we  must  receive  it  in  regard  to  all; 
they  having  by  travel  and  reading  enjoyed  the  advan- 
tages necessary  to  such  knowledge.  And  since  we  have 
their  testimony  to  the  fact  that  Infant  baptism  was  the 
usage  of  the  tvJiole  Church,  handed  down  from  the  Apos- 
tles, we  have  legitimate  proof  of  the  universal  practice 
of  Infant  laptism  in  the  primitive  Church,  For  '-'"what 
has  been  received  everywhere,  always,  hy  all,''  (quod 
ubique,  quod  semper,  quod  ab  omnibus  creditum  est,)  is 
a  rule  to  which  every  one  should  submit  as  authority  in 
the  Christian  Church. 

Iteject  this,  and  admit  that  whilst  Apostles  were  yet 
fresh  in  the  memories  of  many,  the  initiatory  rite  of  the 


INNOVATION  HIGHLY  IMPROBABLE.       113 

Church  had  been  perverted  to  a  use  never  intended,  and 
one  fraught  loitli  the  direst  of  evils,  according  to  some 
Baptist  writers,*  and  that  this  evil  had  spread  through- 
out the  Christian  world,  before  even  the  code  of  laws  left 
for  the  preservation  and  guidance  of  the  Church  could 
be  collected  together,  and  that  no  raan  was  found  to 
protest  against  it  as  unauthorized — no  one  found  out  its 
invalidity  for  a  thousand  years  afterwards — in  conse- 
quence of  which  the  Church  was,  during  all  that  time, 
filled  with  invalid  baptisms,  or  with  persons  not  baptized 
at  all ! — admit  all  this,  and  how  ridiculous  do  we  appear 
in  the  eyes  of  an  infidel  world  !  Into  what  endless  ab- 
surdities do  we  involve  ourselves  ! ! 

Consider  further  the  improbabilities  that  such  an  in- 
novation by  a  public  rite  could  have  gained  foothold 
among  the  next  generation  after  the  Apostles,  without 
opposition. — 

It  must  be  remembered  that  it  was  the  care  of  the 
Apostles,  ^'  to  commit  to  faithful  men  who  shall  be  able 
to  teach  others  also,"  (2  Tim.  ii.  3,)  the  charge  of  the 
churches.  And  we  may  suppose  that  these  "  faithful 
men"  selected  and  instructed  by  the  Apostles  them- 
selves, would  very  probably  continue  the  doctrine  of  their 
instructors  during  their  own  lives.  Now  St.  Jude,  and  St. 
Thomas — also,  St.  Luke,  all  lived  beyond  the  year  70. 
St.  John  died,  as  has  been  before  remarked,  a  little  after 
the  close  of  the  first  century  ;  Timothy  and  Titus  a  few 
years  before.  Polycarp,  the  friend  and  disciple  of  St. 
John,  and  who  also  as  the  angel  (bishop)  of  the  Church 
of  Smyrna,  is  highly  commended  by  the  Head  of  us  all, 
^  See  HowelL 

10* 


114  INNOVATION   WITHOUT    OPPOSITIOI^ 

(Rev.  2  cliap.)  lived  till  about  sixty-five  years  beyond  the 
death  of  St.  John.  And  Ireneus,  the  friend  and  disciple 
of  Polycarp,  lived  about  ninety-six  years  beyond  it,  and 
more  than  ten  years  beyond  the  birth  of  Origen,  who,  as 
has  been  shown,  frequently  appeals  in  his  writings  to  In- 
fant baptism  as  the  common  practice  of  the  Church,  and 
J  says  "it  was  handed  down  from  the  Apostles."  Hence,  if 
/  Infant  baptism  is  an  innovation,  it  was  brought  into  the 
I  Church  during  the  lives  of  Polycarp  and  Ireneus.  And 
although  we  have  seen,  from  the  testimony,  both  di- 
rect and  indirect,  of  Ireneus  and  Justin  Martyr,  (who 
lived,  one  of  them,  through  the  whole  intermediate  time 
between  St.  John  and  Origen,  and  the  other  the  greater 
portion  of  it,)  that  Infant  baptism  was  the  practice  of  the 
Church  during  that  period  and  before  it,  we  will  never- 
theless consider  the  2^robahiUties  of  the  introduction  of  a 
thing  of  the  kind  under  Polycarp  and  Ireneus  without 
open  opposition  on  their  part  to  such  an  innovation. 

St.  John  spent  the  last  years  of  his  life  at  Ephesus, 
and  was  instrumental  in  making  his  friend  Polycarp 
bishop  of  the  Church  of  Smyrna.  Between  these  places 
and  Alexandria,  the  intercourse  by  sea  was  direct,  and 
from  Alexandria  to  Crete  almost  daily.  With  the  cus- 
toms of  the  Churches  of  Alexandria,  Crete,  and  others 
along  the  Mediterranean,  he,  therefore,  could  not  but  be 
familiar.  His  General  Epistle  to  the  Churches,  the 
main  object  of  which,  was  to  confute  the  prevailing  errors 
of  that  time,  and  guard  Christians  against  false  teachers, 
was  written  about  91  or  92,  according  to  Mill  and  Le 
Clerc,  and  as  late  as  the  close  of  that  century,  accord- 
ing  to  Du  Pin,  L'Enfant,  Beausobre,  and  Townscnd. 


HIGHLY  IMPROBABLE  IN  THAT  AGE.      115 

But  in  tliis  epistle  no  allusion  is  made  to  tlie  baptism  of 
young  children  as  one  of  'those  errors,  hence  if  then  prac- 
ticed, it  was  not  an  error.  He  wrote  tlie  Apocalypse, 
or  book  of  "Revelation"  as  is  generally  believed,  after 
his  General  Epistle,  but  more  probably  just  before  it. 
In  which  he  specifies  particularly  the  errors  and  "things 
wanting"  in  the  Churches  of  Asia  Minor,  (Rev.  ii.  and 
iii.)  and  as  the  baptism  of  young  children  is  not  alluded 
to  among  these  errors  and  "things  wanting,"  it  was  of 
course  not  one  of  them.  Because  under  the  influence 
of  the  Spirit  by  which  he  was  directed  to  write,  he  speci- 
fies the  different  things  which  were  disproved.  "  Unto 
the  Angel  of  the  Church  of  Smyrna  write  ...  I  know 
thy  works,  and  tribulations,  and  poverty,  (but  thou  art 
rich)  and  I  know  the  blasphemy  of  them  which  say  they 
are  Jews,  and  are  not,  but  are  of  the  synagogue  of  Satan. 
Fear  none  of  these  things  which  thou  shalt  suffer.  Be- 
hold the  devil  shall  cast  some  of  you  into  prison,  that  ye 
may  be  tried ;  and  ye  shall  have  tribulation  ten  days. 
Be  thou  faithful  unto  death,  and  I  will  give  thee  a  crown 
of  life."  Rev.  ii.  8,  10.  In  the  Church  of  Smyrna, 
therefore,  over  which  it  is  generally  admitted  that  Poly- 
carp  was  the  bishop,  or  angel  thus  addressed,  and  who 
continued  a  zealous  defender  of  the  faith  and  of  Apostolic 
doctrine  through  a  long  life,  we  must  infer  no  error  of 
this  kind  prevailed.  For  this  and  the  Church  of  Phila- 
delphia, are  the  only  two  out  of  the  seven  against  which 
charges  are  not  brought,  and  that  received  the  unquali- 
fied commendation  of  the  Spirit.  For  these,  then,  we 
have  the  testimony  of  the  Spirit,  to  their  freedom  as  yet 
from  innovation. 

The  errors  of  the  others  being  particularly  specified. 


116  INNOVATION   WITHOUT   OPPOSITION 

is  equally  conclusive  against  all  other  errors  not  speci- 
fied. Infant  baptism,  therefore,  if  practiced  in  these 
churches  at  this  time,  has  the  seal  of  the  Spirit's  approval. 
If  not  in  practice,  it  Tvas  introduced  under  Pol  jcarp,  the 
probabilities  of  which  we  will  now  examine  with  refer- 
ence to  his  known  cliaracter  and  vigilance,  as  a  steward 
of  the  heavenly  mysteries. 

He  sealed  his  conviction  of  the  truth  of  what  he 
taught  and  practiced,  by  his  own  life's  blood,  about 
167,  A.  D.,  or  sixty-five  years  after  the  death  of  St. 
John — during  the  persecution  of  Marcus  Antoninus. 
When  the  persecution  began  to  rage  with  great  vio- 
lence, Polycarp,  through  the  persuasion  of  his  friends, 
retired  to  a  farm,  not  far  distant  from  the  city,  and 
there  continued  in  constant  prayer  in  behalf  of  the 
churches.  But  on  hearing  that  some  of  his  friends  were 
put  to  the  torture,  to  make  them  betray  him,  he  could 
remain  no  longer  concealed.  "  The  will  of  the  Lord  be 
done,"  was  his  pious  ejaculation,  and  he  then  came  for- 
ward and  surrendered  himself  to  his  enemies.  When 
brought  to  the  place  of  execution,  the  pro-consul,  be- 
holding his  extreme  age  and  venerable  person,  used 
many  efibrts  to  induce  him  to  renounce  Christ,  that 
he  might  release  him.  To  which  he  replied,  "eighty 
and  six  years  have  I  served  him,  during  all  of  which 
time  he  never  did  me  an  injury,  how  then  can  I 
blaspheme  my  king  and  Saviour  ?"  When  still  fur- 
ther urged,  his  answer  was,  "I  am  a  Christian."  He 
was  then  fastened  to  the  stake,  and  expired  amidst  sur- 
rounding flames.* 

*  See  Eusebius,  lib.  iv.  cap.  passim. 


HIGHLY  IMPROBABLE  IN  THAT  AGE.      117 

This  man,  says  Ireneus  also,  "  had  been  instructed  by 
Apostles,  and  had  familiar  intercourse  with  many  that 
had  seen  Christ ;  he  had  also  been  appointed  bishop  by 
Apostles  in  Asia,  in  the  Church  of  Smyrna,  whom  we 
have  also  seen  in  our  younger  days,  for  he  lived  a  long 
time,  and  to  a  very  advanced  age,  when,  after  a  glori- 
ous and  most  distinguished  martyrdom,  he  departed  this 
life.  He  always  taught  what  he  had  learned  from  the 
Apostles,  what  the  Church  had  handed  down,  and  what 

is  the  only  true  doctrine The  same  Polycarp, 

coming  to  Rome  under  the  Episcopate  of  Anicetus, 
turned  many  of  the  aforesaid  heretics  to  the  Church  of 
God,  proclaiming  the  one  and  only  true  faith  which  he 
had  received  from  the  Apostles — to  wit;  that  which 
was  delivered  by  the  Church."'"^ 

Now  how  much  probability  is  there  that  a  man,  who 
had  been  the  intimate  friend  of  the  Apostle  John,  com- 
mended in  the  inspired  volume  by  Him  "  who  is  the  first 
and  the  last ;"  (Rev.  ii.  8,)  a  man  that  taught  the  "  one 
and  only  true  faith  received  from  the  Apostles,"  would 
permit  an  entirely  unauthorized  error,  utterly  opposed 
to  what  had  always  been  the  doctrine  and  practice  of 
the  Apostles,  (as  Infant  baptism  would  have  been,  if  a 
new  thing,)  and  not  have  raised  his  voice  against  it,  as 
he  did  against  all  other  errors  ?  Who,  I  say,  can  for  a 
moment  entertain  the  surmise,  when  he  sees  how  consci- 
entious, firm,  and  vigilant  was  this  man  for  Apostolic 
doctrine ;  sealing  with  his  own  life's  blood  his  faith  in 
the  same ;  that  he  would  encourage  or  permit  so  radical 
a  chaDo;e  to  be  made  in  the  doctrine  he  had  been 
taught  ? 

•"  Eusebius,  lib.  iv.  cap.  xiv. 


118  INNOVATION   CONTRARY   TO    THE 

To  this  consideration  now  add  also  the  character  and 
influence  of  Ireneus,  who  was  a  friend  and  hearer  of 
Polycarp  more  than  twenty  years ;  whom  all  historians 
unite  in  praising  for  the  elevation  of  his  character,  lofti- 
ness of  his  feelings,  and  value  of  his  writings.  His 
name  was  the  praise  of  martyrs  in  his  own  day,  and  has 
been  handed  down  with  veneration  ever  since.  He  lived 
nearly  through  the  whole  of  the  second  century,  was  a 
strenuous  advocate  of  Apostolic  Usage,  and  the  most 
successful  of  all  the  opposers  of  heresies  during  his  age. 
He  wrote  and  preached  against  all  the  errors  and  new 
doctrines  advocated  in  his  time.  An  extract  from  his 
own  writings  will  show  what  his  character  was  in  this 
respect,  and  what  probability  there  is,  that  he  would 
receive  an  error  of  this  kind. 

Writing  to  Florimus,  who  had  become  the  advocate  of 
certain  new  doctrines,  he  says :  "  These  doctrines  were 
never  delivered  to  thee  by  the  Presbyters  before  us,  those 
who  also  were  the  immediate  disciples  of  the  Apostles. 
For  I  saw  thee  when  I  was  yet  a  boy  in  Lower  Asia  with 
Polycarp,  moving  in  great  splendor  at  court,  and  endeav- 
oring by  all  means  to  gain  his  esteem.  I  remember  the 
events  of  those  times  much  better  than  those  of  more  re- 
cent occurrence.  As  the  studies  of  our  youth,  growing 
with  our  minds,  unite  with  it  so  firmly,  I  can  tell  the 
very  place  where  the  blessed  Polycarp  was  accustomed  to 
sit  and  discourse ;  and  also  his  entrances,  his  walks,  the 
complexion  of  his  life,  and  the  form  of  his  body,  and  his 
conversations  Avith  the  people,  and  his  familiar  inter- 
course with  John,  as  he  was  accustomed  to  tell ;  as  also 
his  familiarity  with  those  that  had  seen  the  Lord.  How  . 
also  he  used  to  relate  their  discourses,  and  what  things 


CHARACTER    OF   APOSTOLIC    MEN.  119 

he  had  heard  from  them  concerning  the  Lord.  Also 
concerning  his  miracles,  his  doctrines ;  all  these  were 
told  by  Polycarp,  in  consistency  with  the  Holy  Scrip- 
tures, as  he  had  received  them  from  the  eye-witnesses  of 
the  doctrine  of  salvation.  These  things,  by  the  mercy 
of  God,  and  the  opportunity  then  afforded  me,  I  atten- 
tively heard,  noting  them  down,  not  on  paper,  but  in 
my  heart;  and  these  same  facts  I  am  always  in  the 
habit,  by  the  grace  of  God,  to  recall  faithfully  to  mind. 
And  I  can  bear  witness  in  the  sight  of  God,  that  if  that 
blessed  and  Apostolic  Presbyter  had  heard  any  such 
thing  as  this,  he  would  have  exclaimed,  and  stopped  his 
ears,  and  according  to  his  custom  would  have  said :  '  0 
good  God,  unto  what  times  hast  thou  reserved  me,  that 
I  should  tolerate  these  things.'  He  would  have  fled 
from  the  place  in  vrhicli  he  sat  or  stood,  hearing  doc- 
trines like  these.  From  his  epistles,  also,  which  he 
wrote  to  the  neighboring  churches,  in  order  to  confirm 
them,  or  to  some  of  the  brethren,  to  encourage  them, 
or  exhort  them,  the  same  thing  may  be  clearly  shown."* 

This  shows  how  anxious  Ireneus  was  to  adhere  to  the 
doctrines  of  the  Apostles,  with  his  father  in  the  Lord, 
Polycarp,  and  also  what  advantages  he  had  for  knowing 
their  doctrines.  He  remembered  what  was  said  and 
done  by  Polycarp  better  than  the  things  that  were  then 
occurring  in  more  advanced  life,  which  is  the  experience 
of  all  old  men  in  regard  to  what  has  occurred  in  youth 
and  early  manhood. 

Now,  how  much  probability  is  there  that  an  entire  new 
practice,  diametrically  opposed  to  what  Baptists  contend 

''•   Eusebius,  lib.  v.  xx. 


120       INNOVATION  CONTRARY  TO  THE 

is  the  only  true  faith,  could  have  been  introduced 
under  this  man  and  Polycarp  ?  The  one,  teaching  the 
''only  true  faith,''  which  he  had  received  from  Apostles 
and  men  who  had  seen  Christ.  The  other,  what  he 
had  heard  from  the  former,  and  old  men  who  were  his 
cotemporaries  ?  The  piety  of  Ireneus  is  acknowledged 
to  be  of  the  highest  character— whose  love  and  zeal  for 
truth  led  him  tooppose  with  great  earnestness  the  least 
departure  from  Apostolic  Usage — even  writing  out  in 
order,  one  by  one,  everything  which  he  regarded  as  op- 
posed to,  or  wanting  Apostolic  authority  ? 

The  character  of  these  tw^o  men  alone,  ought  to  be 
sufficient  refutation  of  a  groundless  suspicion  like  that 
alleged  against  Infant  baptism.  For  it  has  not  a 
vestige  of  testimony  to  sustain  it,  save  a  contract- 
ed method  of  interpreting  the  Scriptures,  which  is 
utterly  at  variance  with  the  spirit  and  design  of  their 
Author. 

If  this  controversy  w^ere  concerning  the  introduction 
and  establishing  of  a  new  thing  in  the  Church,  there  might 
be  some  apology  for  hesitating  to  adopt  it.  But  it  is  about 
a  sacred  rite,  found  in  the  Church  in  its  earliest  and 
purest  days,  practiced  in  every  place  where  the  Church 
was  planted,  and  regarded  as  of  Divine  authority,  from 
the  first  time  that  it  is  alluded  to.  Hence  the  question 
to  be  settled,  is,  shall  this  ancient,  universal  rite,  so 
highly  prized  by  primitive  Christians,  handed  down 
with  and  sustained  by  the  Scriptures,  (as  the  majority 
of  Christians  in  every  age  have  interpreted  them)  be 
cast  out  of  the  Church  as  an  innovation  ?  or  shall  it  be 
continued  ? 


CHARACTER    OF   APOSTOLIC    MEN.  121 

How  can  an  unbiassed,  conscientious  man  resist  such 
testimony  and  not  feel  himself  bound  to  continue  it,  Ayere 
the  Scriptures  even  silent  on  the  subject,  which  we  shall 
show  is  not  the  case.  Ireneus  lived  through  the  whole 
time  in  which  it  could  possibly  have  been  introduced,  if 
an  innovation ;  while  his  known  character,  in  the  first 
place,  contradicts  the  supposition  that  it  could  be  intro- 
duced in  his  time  and  not  be  openly  opposed  by  him — his 
works  against  heresies  and  novelties,  in  the  second,  show 
that  it  is  not  recorded  and  classed  amono;  them — and  his 
written  declaration,  in  the  third  and  last  place,  shows 
that  Christ's  commission  to  his  Apostles  authorized  it. 

To  Polycarp  and  Ireneus  may  be  added  Justin  Martyr, 
who,  though  not  born  of  Christian  parents,  was  born  in 
Palestine,  in  the  midst  of  Christians,  about  the  close  of 
the  Apostolic  age — studied  in  the  schools  of  philosophy 
in  Alexandria — wrote  his  celebrated  apology  for  Chris- 
tians about  forty  years  after  the  death  of  St.  John — 
preached  the  Gospel  in  Italy,  Asia  Minor  and  Egypt,  the 
very  country  of  the  Origen  family, — wrote  against  the 
heresy  of  Marcion  and  others  at  Rome,  and  suffered 
martyrdom  for  his  religion,  about  the  year  after  the 
Apostles  65. 

Is  it  probable  that  this  man,  who  boldly  attacks 
other  departures  from  the  faith  of  the  Apostles — ad- 
vocated Christianity  in  the  face  of  persecuting  Em- 
perors— and  gave  his  own  life  in  defence  of  the  truth, 
would  countenance  a  public  innovation  of  this  character? 

We  here  appeal  to  the  candor  of  every  reader  who  can 
comprehend  the  very  plainest  kind  of  reasoning,  to  say 
whether  there  is  the  least  ground  for  supposing  that  a 
11 


122  SUMMARY    OF    HISTORICAL    TESTIMONY. 

new  public  rite,  like  that  of  Infant  baptism  could  have 
been  introduced  into  the  Church  during  the  lives  of 
these  men — or  that  it  could  have  spread  over  Christen- 
dom and  become  the  established  practice  of  churches  ex- 
tending thousands  of  miles  (as  the  testimony  of  Origen 
shows  it  had)  and  not  one  word  be  uttered  against  it  ?  Not 
one  man  found  to  rise  up  and  oppose  such  an  innovation 
on  the  sacred  usages  of  his  fathers  and  the  Apostles  ? 
Is  the  mere  surmise  that  because  Infant  baptism  is  not 
commanded  in  the  Holy  Scriptures  in  such  terms  as  some 
have  unwarrantably  prescribed  for  it,  sufficient  of  itself 
to  establish  the  point  that  it  was  introduced  under  these 
men,  in  the  face  of  all  this  to  the  contrary  ? 

Does  not  the  manner  in  which  Infant  baptism  is  first 
mentioned,  after  the  Apostolic  age,  indicate  its  antiquity 
as  well  as  prevalence  ?  It  is  never  referred  to  as  some- 
thing new,  or  as  that  about  which  there  was  any  doubt, 
but  incidentally  mentioned  as  occasion  required,  and  as 
a  thing  well  known  to  all ;  and  its  authority  is  questioned 
by  none.  Just  as  any  other  rite  would  be  referred  to, 
concerning  which  there  was  no  dispute,  when  other 
questions  called  it  forth.  How  can  we  account  for 
this  but  on  the  principle  that  it  had  been  the  practice 
of  the  Church  from  the  first  ? 

Thus  evidence  positive  and  negative,  from  different 
sources,  and  in  various  ways  accumulates,  and  with 
united  strength  scatters  as  chafi"  before  the  wind  all  sus- 
picions against  the  validity  of  Infant  baptism. 

We  have  seen,  by  tracing  its  history,  that  it  has 
been  the  practice  of   the   Church   in    every  age  since 


SUMMARY    OF    HISTORICAL   TESTIMONY.  123 

the  Apostles.     We  have  followed  it  in  a  continuous  line 
from  the  present,  first,  to  the  time  of  the  great  Pelagian  ; 
controversy  which  agitated  the  Church  throughout  the  { 
Christian  world  ;  when — 


A.  D.  417 

or 
A.  A.  317. 


A.  A.  317. 


A.  A.  318. 


Augustine,  the  most  learned  man  of  that  age, 
then  declared,  "The  baptism  of  little  infants  is  held 
by  the  Universal  Church,  and  not  instituted  by 
Councils,  but  ever  in  use,  handed  down  by  none 
other  than  Apostolical  authority."     When — 

Celestius  admitted  ''  Infants  ought  to  be  baptized  ^-  ^-  ^^^' 
according  to  the  Ride  of  the  Uiiiversal  Church  and 
meaning  of  the  Gospel.'"     And, 

Pelagius  said,  "  He  never  heard  even  of  an  impi- 
ous heretic  that  would  deny  baptism  to  little  chil- 
dren." 

In  a  Council  held  in  Carthage,  about  the  same 
time,  it  was  ''^Resolved,  Whosoever  says  Infants 
are  baptized  for  the  remission  of  sins,  but  yet 
they  derive  no  original  sin  from  Adam,  which  is 
expiated  by  the  laver  of  regeneration,  let  him  be 
anathema." 

Advancing  onward  wx  come  to  another  Council,  in 
which,  in  cases  of  doubt  in  regard  to  the  baptism  of 
little  children  who  had  been  captured  and  taken  off 
by  the  enemy  before  they  were  old  enough  to  remem- 
ber, and  afterwards  recovered,  it  was  "Resolved, 
That  such  be  baptized  without  any  scruple ;  lest  that 
scruple  do  cause  them  to  go  without  the  cleansing  of 
the  sacrament." 


124  SUMMARY    OF   HISTORICAL    TESTIMONY. 

A  few  years  nearer  to  the  Apostles,  a  Canon  was 
passed  at  Carthage  concerning  such  as  had  come  into 
the  Church  from  some  of  the  schismatical  sects, 
which  gave  to  little  children  an  advantage  in  regard 
to  Church  offices  over  those  who  acted  on  their  own 
responsibility  when  they  united  with  the  Donatists. 

A.  A.  297.  It  was  ^''Resolved,  That  they  who  were  baptized  in 
their  Infancy  among  the  Donatists,  before  they  vrere 
old  enough  to  understand  the  mischief  of  that  error, 
ought  to  be  promoted  to  Church  offices,  especially  in 
times  of  so  great  need,"  &c.  The  case  of  the  others 
was  deferred  to  another  time. 

A.  A.  2S0.  Chrysostom  writes,  "  Our  Circumcision — I  mean 
the  Grace  of  Baptism — gives  cure  without  pain,  and 
haS  no  determinate  time  as  that  had,  (the  eighth  day) 
but  it  is  lawful  to  one  at  the  beginning  of  life,  (first 
day  of  his  birth)  or  in  the  middle  of  it,  or  in  old  age, 
to  receive  this  circumcision,  made  without  hands." 
He  also  enumerates  the  benefits  of  baptism,  and 
adds,  "  For  this  cause  we  baptize  infants  also,  that 
they  be  not  defiled  by  sin." 

A.  A.  278.  Jerome,  the  author  of  the  Latin  translation  of  the 
Holy  Scriptures,  called  the  Vulgate,  writing  to  a  lady 
of  distinction  says  :  "  The  good  and  evil  deeds  of  the 
child  are  imputed  to  his  parent.  Unless  you  suppose 
the  children  of  Christians,  if  they  do  not  receive 
baptism,  are  themselves  accountable  for  the  sin. 
And  the  wickedness  not  imputed  to  those  who  would 
not  give  it  to  them,  particularly  at  the  time  they 


SUMMARY   OF   HISTORICAL   TESTIiMONY.  125 

ought  to  receive  it,  and  could  make  no  opposition  to 
receiving  it." 

Ambrose,  bishop  of  Milan,  writes :  ^'  No  man  ^-  ■*■•  274. 
comes  to  the  kingdom  of  Heaven  but  bj  the  sacra- 
ment of  baptism."*  For  which  he  quotes  our 
Saviour's  words  to  Nicodemus,  "  Unless  any  one  be 
born  again  of  water  and  of  the  Spirit,  he  cannot 
enter  the  kingdom  of  Heaven,"  and  makes  this  com- 
ment :  "  You  see  He  (Christ)  excepts  no  person — not 
an  Infant,  not  one  that  is  hindered  by  any  unavoida- 
ble accident. "t 

Optatus,  bishop  of  Milevium,  calls  baptism  a  "gar-  ■^*  ^  260 
ment  that  fits  all  ages — not  too  big  for  Infants  nor 
too  small  for  men." 

Gregory  Nazianzen  was  of  opinion  that  "baptism  a.  a.  260. 
to  Infants  might  be  delayed  till  three  years  of  age, 
or   thereabouts,    unless    danger    made   it   necessary 
sooner.     And  in  such  cases  must  not  be  postponed." 

Basil,  bishop  of  Caesarea,  specifying  the  proper  a.  a.  205. 
time  for  various  things,  remarked,    "  The  whole  of 
one's  life   is  proper  for   baptism."     That   is,   from 
infancy  up  to  old  age,  or  until  received. 

A  Council  in  Eliberis  decided  that  those  baptized  a.  a.  205. 
in  infancy  by  schismatical   sects,  might  be  received 
into  the   Church  without  the  same  delay  that  was 
imposed  on  such  as  were  grown  up  when  baptized  by 
them." 

•^  i.  e.  no  other  prescribed  mode  for  any. 

f  Such,  he  thought,  would  not  suifer  positive  punishment,  but 
he  could  not  say  they  -would  certainly  enter  the  kingdom  of 
heaven. 

11* 


126  SUMMARY   OF   HISTORICAL   TESTIMONY. 


A.  A.  150. 


A  Council  in  Carthage,  to  whom  was  referred  the 
question  whether  it  would  not  be  better  to  delay 
baptism  to  the  eighth  day  after  birth  than  to  give  it 
to  children  so  young  as  two  or  three  days  old,  deci- 
ded in  the  negative,  ''lest  by  such  delay  some  might  v 
die  without  it,"  and  added,  ''As  far  as  in  us  lies;  no 
soul,  if  possible,  is  to  be  lost." 

A.^^^no.  Origen,  who  was  himself  baptized  in  infancy,  and 
whose  father  and  grandfather  were  Christians  before 
him,  concerning  "  the  sinful  nature  of  every  one  born 

A.  A.  86.  into  the  world,"  remarks :  "  It  is  for  this  reason  the 
Church  had  from  the  xipostles  the  injunction  to  give 
baptism  to  little  children."  Again,  "No  one  is  free 
from  pollution,  though  his  life  is  but  the  length  of  one 

day Therefore,  according  to  the  usage  of  the 

Church,  baptism  is  given  to  little  children." 

Tertullian,  confining  baptism  to  the  washing 
away  of  past  sins,  advised  its  delay  to  all  young  per- 
sons, virgins,  and  those  in  widowhood,  and  all  such  as 
were  likely  to  fall  into  sin  after  baptism ;  and,  of  course 
included  young  children.  He  asks,  "What  need  is 
there  that  their  sponsors  be  brought  into  danger,  for 
they  may  fail  in  their  promises  by  their  OAvn  death, 
or  by  the  child's  proving  of  a  wicked  disposition."* 
Which  shows  that  Infant  baptism  was  the  usage  of  the 
Church  at  that  time,  or  he  could  not  have  referred  to 
it  and  its  connection  with  sponsors. 


*  Which  proves  that  sponsors  were  then  used  by  Christians  as 
they  were  among  the  Jews. 


Wrote 
A.  A.  100. 


Born 
A.  A.  45 


SUMMARY   OF   HISTORICAL   TESTIMONY.  127 

Ireneus,  wlio  was  born  about  the  close  of  the  .^•'^'^ /^f,^<^ 

"  the  end  of  the 

Apostolic  age,  and  lived  througb  nearly  the  -whole  of  ^^^p*^^ Lived 
the  second  century,  writes:   "  Christ  came  to  save  all  nearfy^the 
who   are  through  him  regenerated  (baptized)   unto  Sid^centmy! 
God — Infants,   and   little    ones,   and   children,    and  the  birth  of 
youths,  and  elder   persons;"  hence,   all  ages.*     He 
also  wrote  a  history  of  the  different  sects — beginning 
with  those  that  arose  in  Apostolic  times,  and  brought 
it  down  to  nearly  the  close  of  his  own  life — in  which 
he  specifies  the  errors  and  points  of  difference  between 
them  and  the  Church,  but  infant  baptism  was  not  a 
point  of  difference,  they  were  all  agreed  on  this  point, 
which  confirms  its  Apostolic  origin  and  common  prac- 
tice.    For  it  was  during  the  life  of  this  writer  that 
Origen  was  born  and  baptized  in  his  infancy,  and  if 
the  sects  that  arose  in  the  days  of  the  Apostles  did  not 
differ  from  the  Apostles  on  this  point,  nor  the  Church 
in  his  day,  they  must  all  have  baptized  infants. 

Thus  by  testimony  of  a  two-fold  character  does  he 
certify  to  the  practice  of  Infant  baptism  before  and 
during  his  own  life,  and  he  born  at  the  close  of  the 
Apostolic  age,  and  taught  by  a  pupil  of  St.  John. 

Justin   Martyr  was   born  in  the  times  of  the  ApoL^lge. 

Wrote 

Apostles,  and  wrote  about  forty  years  after  St.  John's   a.  a.  -lo 
death.     In    his    Apology   for    Christians   he    says : 
^^  I  hnoiv  many  of  both  sexes,  sixty  and  seventy  years 
old,  lolio  were  made  disciples  to  Christ  from  childhood. 
Hence  they  were  baptized  in  childhood  in  the  middle  of 

^  Regeneration  always  included  baptism  in  the  writings  of 
Ireneus,  and  was  used,  in  the  same  sense  generally  at  that  time, 
says  Wall.  Neander  admits,  "  this  passage,  without  doubt,  points 
to  Infant  baptism."' 


128  'summary  op  testimony 

d^ys  iTf  the^^®  Apostolic  age,  as  there  can  be  no  other  way  to 
Apostles,   jjiake  children  disciples  of  Christ  but  by  baptism.*  He 
also  tells  us  that  ''  Christians  receive  their  circumcision 
in  baptism" — and  calls  baptism   "  Christ's   circum- 
cision/^ By  which  he  teaches  that  baptism  has  taken 
le  place  of  circumcision  as  the  initiatory  rite  of  the 
Church   under   the    Christian    dispensation,   and   in 
which  he  is  supported  by  Origen,  Chrysostom,  Basil, 
Augustine,  and  others  of  the  most  noted  of  the  Chris- 
tian Fathers.    Thus  testifying,  first,  to  many  baptized 
in  childhood  in  Apostolic  days, — and  second,  to  the 
right  of  little  children  to  baptism  by  virtue  of  their 
right  to  circumcision. 
Born  in  .the     PoLYCARP,  the  disciplc  of  St.  Johu,  who  "  altvaifs 
pufUaSt  ^<^^^^^^^  ^^^^  ^^^  ^'^^y  ^^'^^  faitl^'  lived  nearly  thirty 
by  St.  John,  years   beyond   the  time  when  Justin  wrote,  whose 
character  is  a  guaranty  that  he  would  have  sanction- 
ed no  innovation  in  his  day. 
Born  and       Clement  and  Hermas  wrotc,  both  of  them,  during 

wrote  while  '  ^  70 

^^wetr^'et'^''*  the  lives  of  the  Apostles,  and  their  writings  were  read 
living,  'y^  some  of  the  Churches  for  a  time  as  authoritative 
teaching.  And  like  all  others  who  had  received  and 
submitted  to  the  teaching  of  St.  Paul,  they  held  that 
tlie  pollution  of  original  sin  needed  cleansing  as 
well  as  that  of  actual  sin.  Clement  writes,  "  Infants 
as  well  as  others  are  corrupt.  .  .  .  None  is  free  from 
iwlluiion  tlioiigli  his  life  he  hut  one  clay  on  the  earth.'' 
Afterwards,  "  He  that  brouglit  us  into  this  world  hath 
prepared  for  us  his  benefits." 

*  Baptism  fit  any  age  before  capable  of  acting  as  a  moral  agent 
is  virtually  Infant  baptism. 


HISTORICAL   AND   CIRCUMSTANTIAL.  129 

Hermas  says, — '''Baptism  is  necessary  to  all — and 
■whosoever  shall  continue  as  Infants  is  more  honor  able 
than  all,  for  Infayits  are  esteemed  hy  our  Lord  as  first  of 
alir 

Now  after  tracing  Infant  baptism  up  to  the  days  of 
the  Apostles,  add  what  these  cotemporaries  of  the 
Apostles  say  about  original  sin — the  necessity  of  bap- 
tism to  all — the  estimation  in  which  Infants  are  held, 
and  how  could  circumstantial  and  positive  proof  more 
perfectly  unite  and  sustain  each  other  ?  And  remember 
that  about  the  same  time,  the  baptism  of  whole  families 
by  the  Apostles  is  reported  as  a  common  thing — 
children  called  '•^Saints''  in  the  letters  of  the  Apostles, 
and  directions  given  to  their  parents  for  their  "train- 
ing and  nurture  in  the  Lord." 

Again  that  baptism  has  superseded  circumcision,  (as 
we  shall  further  prove)  holds  the  same  place,  in  the  same 
Church,  while  the  law  for  Infant  membership  has  never 
been  repealed. 

And  yet  again,  that  Infant  baptism  was  the  doctrine 
and  practice  of  the  universal  Church  before  the 
Neio  Testament  Qanon  ivas  even  settled — was  always 
referred  to,  as  a  thing  well  known  and  acknowledged 
by  all — and  has  the  consentient  testimony  of  antiquity 
to  its  authority.  Quod  ubique,  quod  semper,  quod  ab 
omnibus  creditum  est,  '•'Received  everywhere,  alivays,by 
all.''     A  laiv  professedly  submitted  to  by  all. 

Whenever  history  and  the  testimony  of  the  ancient 
Fathers  are  appealed  to  in  controverted  questions  of  the 


130  CORRECT   MODE    OF 

present  day,  it  is  the  custom  of  many  to  reply,  ''Oh  this 
is  the  way  by  which  the  claims  of  Romanism  are  estab- 
lished." Not  so,  but  exactly  the  reverse.  This  is  the 
way  to  divest  Rome  of  all  her  pretended  claims.  What- 
ever was  the  doctrine  and  practice  of  Christians  '-' al- 
ivays,  everywhere^  hy  alV  in  the  primitive  Church,  if 
an  essential  doctrine,  must  be  continued.  And  whatever 
Rome  can  gain  by  that  rule  let  her  have — nor  should  we 
abandon  it,  because  she  has  it.  But  bring  her  to  the 
test  of  the  Holy  Scriptures  interpreted  by  the  universal 
practice  and  teaching  of  the  primitive  Church,  and  you 
strip  her  of  all  claims  and  pretensions  beyond  what  be- 
longed to  the  other  Churches  established  by  the  Apos- 
tles. And  this  can  be  done  without  making  our  Holy 
religion  the  sport  of  infidels,*  or  admitting  any  writing 
that  will  not  bear  the  test  of  sound  criticism. 

Trace  back  the  unauthorized  dogmas  of  the  Romish 
Church  as  we  have  the  history  of  Infant  baptism,  and 
how  many  of  them  w^ill  you  find  in  the  primitive  Church, 
immediately  after  the  death  of  the  Apostles  ?  How  far 
do  you  trace  back  the  "  Immaculate  Conception  ?"  How 
far  Transubstantiation  ?  The  worship  of  the  Host  ? 
Can  Rome  trace  back  the  doctrine  of  Indulgences — or  the 
worship  of  the  Virgin  Mary,  or  the  practice  of  praying 
to  departed  Saints,  or  Purgatory,  or  any  authority  in 
the  bishop  of  Rome  over  his  fellow  bishops,  to  the  next 
century  after  the  Apostles?  No.  Such  doctrines  and 
such  authority  were  unknown  to  the  Christian  Church 
in  that  age.  And  what  ignorance  to  call  Infant  baptism 
a  "  Relic  of  Popery  !"     What  tyro  does  not  know  that 

^'  As  docs  the  rejection  of  all  antiquity. 


EXPOSING    ERROR.  181 

Infant  baptism  was  long  in  the  Church  before  Popery 
began  ? 

If  you  would  expose  the  fallacies  of  the  Roman  Church, 
trace  them  back  to  their  origin,  and  show  when  and  how 
they  began,  and  their  inconsistency  with  the  teaching  of 
the  Holy  Scriptures,  and  early  practice  of  the  Church. 
This  was  the  way  the  English  Reformation  was  con- 
ducted, and  this  is  the  only  way,  to  take  our  stand  on  a 
basis  that  the  combined  powers  of  Infidelity  and  Roman- 
ism can  never  shake. 

Thus,  we  can  show  that  Infant  communion,  which  is 
so  often  lugged  in  to  detract  from  the  authority  of 
Infant  baptism,  is  never  spoken  of  before  the  time  of 
Cyprian,  and  never  became  universal  in  the  Church. 
As  to  customs  unimportant  in  their  nature,  such  as 
chrism,  the  holy  kiss,  washing  of  feet,  &c.,  partly  social 
and  partly  religious,  which  may  be  continued  or  omitted 
without  affecting  the  essential  character  of  the  Church, 
let  those  continue  them  v/ho  may  choose  to  do  so.  But 
a  rite  fundamental  in  the  o7^ganization  of  the  visible 
Church,  like  that  of  Infant  baptism,  which  involves  the 
validity  of  the  baptism  of  generations,  and  places  our 
little  children  in  a  relation  to  God,  and  to  ourselves, 
with  claims  to  the  care  and  sacred  training  of  parents 
and  Christian  friends,  (that  few  appreciate,  and  fewer 
still  discharge) — such  a  rite  is  of  vital  import  to  the 
nature  of  the  Church,  and  to  the  character  of  its  mem- 
bership. It  is  one  of  those  things  that  cannot  be  left 
to  our  own  choice,  and  laid  aside.  It  has  an  authority 
that  knows  no  distinction  between  "Divine"  and  "Apos- 
tolic."   Whatever  was  ordered  by  the  Apostles,  of  like 


132  DUTY    OF   ALL    CHRISTIANS. 

nature,  is  as  binding  as  that  instituted  by  the  Saviour 
in  person.  They  were  his  appointed  agents,  divinely 
inspired ;  and  what  they  established  as  an  essential  ele- 
ment in  the  visible  Church  of  Christ  cannot  be  discarded 
and  laid  aside  by  Christians.  Those  who  have  been  so 
much  influenced  by  the  slang  about  ''  baby  sprinkling" 
that  they  cannot  rest  contented  vi'iih.  pouring  the  water  on 
the  infant,  ought  to  have  it  baptized  by  diioping  it  into 
the  water.  For  they  cannot  omit  the  baptism  of  their 
children  altogether,  without  injury  to  the  child,  and  the 
sin  of  violating  the  order  of  the  Church  of  God.  Nor 
can  those  who  have  no  children  of  their  own,  unite  with 
those  who  exclude  little  children,  without  incurring  like 
condemnation. 


HISTORICAL  TABLE. 


133 


THIS  TABLE  REPRESENTS  INFANT  MEMBERSHIP  EXISTING  IN  THE 
CHURCH  OF  GOD  AT  THE  BIRTH  OF  CHRIST  AND  AS  TRACED  BY  A 
CHANNEL  THROUGH  THE  FIRST  FOUR  CENTURIES  OF  CHRISTIANITY. 


a 

Birth  of  Christ. 

«-( 

A.  D.     33 

H 

Christian  Dispensation  begun. 

"        49 

g 

Circumcision  discn.ssed. 

K 

50 

g 

td 

Household  baptisms  recorded. 

O                      «5     te| 

— "-    67 

Polycarp  born. 

s« 

t;; 

72 

H 

Jude  died. 

>3     ,.^ 

76 

^ 

Luke  died. 

94 
— "—    97 

^3 

Titus  died. 
J  Ireneus  born. 
I  Timothy  died. 

M^          W 

w 
^ 

ENEU 

3MAN. 
ASTOR. 
JUST 

A.  D.  100 

fe? 

Close  of  Apostolic  age. 

^3 

—"—102 
"      103 

.  > 

H 

St.  John  died. 
Justin  Martyr  born. 

^ 

■<^, 

"      14o 

S 

TertuUiah  born. 

LIVE 

CLEMEN 

MARTY 
TERTl 

"      16.5 

a 

H 

Justin  Martyr  died. 

^ 

- 

— "      167 

g 

Polycarp  died. 

186  OR 
T  ALEX. 

R. 
rLLIAN. 

o 

— "—  186 

y 

Origen  born. 

§ 

"      198 

_ 

Ireneus  died. 

A.  p.  200  ) 

>^ 

> 

100  After  Apostolic  age. 

Tertullian  wrote. 

U 

"       210  } 
"       220  ( 
"       246 

H 

......  t^ 

Origen  wrote. 

t-i 

M 

Cyprian  converted. 

q 

"       2.50 

w 

El 

Council  of  Carthage. 

S 

"       2.51 

Novatian  schism. 

i 

"       259 

^ 

3 

Origen  died. 

A.  D.  300 

200  After  Apostolic  age. 

"      305 

"^ 

Council  of  Eliberi.s. 

"      311 

^ 

Donatists  arose. 

"      328 

2! 

Gregory  Nazianzen  born. 

"      329 

Basil  born. 

"      331 

H 

S 

Jerome  born. 

"      344 

Chrysostom  born. 

"      354 

Augu.stin  born. 

"      360 

W 

Council  of  Milevium. 

"      374 

2 

Ambrose  wrote. 

"      397 

t> 

Third  Council  of  Carthage. 

A.  D.  400 

O 

Fifth  Council  of  Carthage. 

"      417 

o 

Pelagian  controversy. 

"      429 

^ 

Various  Councils. 

"      431 

i 

o 

General  Council  of  East  and 

\Vest. 

12 


CHAPTER  y. 


RELATION  or  BAPTISM  TO  CIRCUMCISION. 

A  church  on  earth  when  Christ  came — The  temple  and  synagogue  services 
— Preceded  by  the  Tabernacle  with  its  altar,  mercy  seat  and  consecrated 
ministers — preceded  by  the  Abrahamic  and  patriarchial  dispensations — 
Circumcision  the  outward  token  of  the  Abrahamic  covenant,  sealing 
spiritual  and  temporal  promises — Abraham  made  the  father  of  a  spiritual 
seed,  in  virtue  of  being  at  the  head  of  a  covenant  bearing  the  seal  of  the 
righteousness  of  faith — This  covenant  perpetual — Mosaic  dispensation 
added  to  it — Circumcision  continued  to  the  coming  of  Christ,  "  the 
promised  seed" — The  change  of  the  seal  from  circumcision  to  bap- 
tism did  not  affect  the  right  of  Infants — The  law  for  their  membership 
having  not  been  repealed,  they  have  the  same  claim  to  baptism  that 
they  had  to  circumcision — Baptism  called  Christian  circumcision  by 
primitive  Christians — Held  the  same  jolace  in  the  same  church  while  cir- 
cumcision has  passed  away. 

We  shall  now  proceed  to  examine  more  closely  the 
connection  between  Baptism  and  Circumcision.  For  if 
Justin  Martyr  and  the  Ancient  Fathers  of  the  Church 
are  right  in  calling  Baptism  "  Christian  Circumcision," 
and  in  teaching  that  Baptism  has  taken  the  place 
of  Circumcision  under  the  Christian  Dispensationj  then 
we  have  another  separate  and  distinct  line  of  proof, 
full  and  independent  of  all  others,  leading  to  the  same 
result. 

In  the  first  place,  we  must  admit  that  the  early  Fa- 
thers of  the  Church  had  as  good,  and  even  better,  oppor- 


THE  REDEEMER  COME  TO  ZION.  135 

tunities  to  learn  what  was  a  doctrine  of  the  Apostles 
than  we  have ;  for  Justin  had  the  instruction  of  those 
who  had  seen  and  heard  the  Apostles,  to  aid  him  in 
the  interpretation  of  their  writings.  And  if  circum- 
cision under  the  Old  has  been  succeeded  by  baptism 
under  the  New  Dispensation,  it  follows  that  infant  chil- 
.dren  must  be  baptized ;  for  we  all  know  they  were 
circumcised  by  expy^ess  laiv.  And  unless  that  law 
has  been  repealed,  it  of  course  covers  the  substitute 
as  it  did  the  rite  in  whose  place  it  stands,  and  therefore 
binds  Christians  to  the  duty  ot  continuing  infant  mem- 
bership and  family  religion  under  the  New  Administra- 
tion. Changing  merely  the  "seal"  of  a  covenant,  contract, 
or  deed  of  gift,  does  not  affect  or  change  the  covenant 
itself.  The  new  seal  covers  what  the  old  one  did  at  the 
time  the  change  was  made.  So  little  children  have  the 
same  religious  privileges  under  the  seal  of  baptism 
which  they  had  under  circumcision. 

But  has  the  seal  of  circumcision  been  changed  into 
that  of  baptism  ?  or  does  baptism  occupy  the  same  place 
as  a  religious  rite  under  the  Gospel  Dispensation  that 
circumcision  did  under  the  Jewish  ?  And  is  the  Church 
of  Christ  a  continuation,  in  its  essentials^  of  the  An- 
cient Church  or  Covenant  into  which  God's  former 
people  were  received  and  trained  ?  When  the  "  Re- 
deemer came  to  Zion,"*  did  He  find  no  church,  no  tem- 
ple, no  synagogue,  no  religious  organization,  in  the  public 
worship  of  which  He  and  His  Apostles  could  unite  on  the 
Sabbath  day  ?  Luke  iv.  16,  Acts  xiii.  14.  Or  did  He 
destroy   that    ''kingdom"    which    He    compared   to    a 

*  Isaiah,  ch.  lix. 


136  WORSHIP  OF  THE  JEWS. 

''vineyard,"  and  forewarned  the  Jews  that  it  would 
"  be  taken  from  them  and  given  to  a  people  bringing 
forth  the  fruits  thereof?"  Matth.  xxi.  43.  Or  was  it 
merely  transferred  into  the  hands  of  other  husbandmen, 
as  he  said  it  would  be  ?  And  under  its  new  adminis- 
tration improved  and  enlarged  by  more  efficient  culture 
and  better  regulations  ? 

Now  we  know  that  our  Saviour  did  find  such  a 
Church,  and  that  He  and  His  Apostles  did  recognise 
the  Divine  authority  of  its  ordinances  and  worship. 
And  that  it  was  "their  custom"  to  attend  and  unite  in 
the  services  of  the  temple  and  synagogues.*  And  we 
know  also,  that  in  this  Church  were  trained  the  prophets 
and  holy  men  of  old,  who  spake  as  they  were  moved  by 
the  Holy  Ghost.  And  that  to  "Israel"  were  "committed 
the  oracles  of  God."  Rom.  iii.  2.  And  that  to  them 
as  the  Church  of  God,  ''pertained  the  adoption,  and 
the  glory,  and  the  covenants,  and  the  giving  of  the 
law,  and  the  service  of  God,  and  the  2?romises.  Rom. 
ix.  5.  And  that  this  temple  succeeded  to  the  taber- 
nacle, with  its  altar  and  mercy  seat,  its  consecrated 
ministers,  and  prescribed  services — all  fashioned  and 
modeled  according  to  God's  own  appointment,  Exod. 
XXV.  40,  called  the  "  Church  in  the  Wilderness."  Acts 
vii.  38.  Not  a  promiscuous  assembly,  as  ^xx-kyiokx  some- 
times denotes,  but  a  regular  ecclesiastical  organization, 
denominated  by  St.  Paul,  "A  house,"  in  which  Moses 
acted  as  a  "servant,"  and  afterward  Christ  as  a  "son." 
''Whose  house  are  we,"  says  the  Apostle.  Heb.  iii.  5, 
6  ;  compare  Ps.  xxii.  and  Ixx.  and  Heb.  ii.  12. 

*  Luke  iv.  16  ;  Acts  xiii.  14  ;  xv.  21  ;  xvi.  13; 


And  further  we  knoTV,  that  in  this  Church  in  which 
Moses  was  faithful  as  a  "  servant,"  and  which  is  called 
bj  the  various  names  of  ^' House,"  ''Israel,"  "Zion," 
"  Vineyard  of  the  Lord,"*  &c.,  was  taught  and  practiced 
the  worship  of  the  true  God,  and  the  duties  of  the  true 
religion. t  And  that  for  the  preservation  and  continu- 
ance of  this  religion  and  worship,  Moses  was  raised  up, 
and  commanded  to  conduct  this  people  into  a  land  to 
themselves. "J  They  having  become  seriously  affected 
with  idolatry  and  sins  of  the  Egyptians,  during  their 
sojourn  among,  and  their  oppression  by  that  nation;  in 
order  to  deliver  them  from  this  oppression,  and  reform 
their  religion, §  Moses  was  appointed  to  remove  them  to 
a  land  favorable  to  this  work,  and  to  give  them  a  system 
of  laws,  rites  and  ceremonies  adapted  to  this  end ;  and 
for  the  transmission  of  this  religion  to  the  dawning  forth 
of  a  brighter  day,  whose  rising  sun  would  reveal  with 
perfect  clearness  its  glorious  beauties  now  so  dimly  seen 
under  a  darker  dispensation.  || 

Hence  the  Apostle  Paul  tells  us,  "  The  law  (Mosaic 
Dispensation)  was  added  because  of  trangression  till  the 
seed  (Christ)  should  come."  Gal.  iii.  19.  The  corrupt 
state  of  the  world,  and  the  sins  and  idolatry  with  which 
Israel  had  become  infected,  made  it  necessary  to  add, 
to  the  Covenant  of  Grace  under  which  they  lived,  the 
dispensation  of  Moses,  as  subservient  to  the  preservation 
and  continuance  of  the  doctrines  and  truths  of  their  reli- 


^  Isaiah  v.   1 — 7. 

f  Exod.  iii ;  xviii ;  xix.  Leviticus,  Dent.,  Acts  vii.  34 — 38. 

%  Exod.  iii.  12.    ix.  1.  xx.  chap. 

I  Joshua  xxiv.  2—14.  ||  Gal.  iii.  19.     Heb.  x.  1. 

12* 


138  PRINCIPLES  OF  god's  GOVERNMENT 

gion  to  the  coming  of  Christ  with  his  brighter  light  and 
more  perfect  dispensation. 

The  Jews  had  long  been  in  covenant  relations  with 
God,  chosen  by  him  for  his  select  people,  to  whom  He 
promised  the  special  doctrines  and  duties  of  religion,  and 
whom  He  had  brought  into  a  Church  state  for  the  purpose 
of  preserving  and  handing  down  the  worship  of  the  true 
God,  and  the  promises  connected  with  a  coming  Saviour. 

This  solemn  covenant  had  been  ratified  by  an  outward 
and  visible  sign  and  symbol  of  a  new  heart,*  and  had 
been  in  existence  from  the  time  of  Abraham,  bearing 
the  sign  of  circumcision — '^  a  seal  of  the  rig7iteous7iess  of 
faith"  that  its  blessings  "  7night  he  of  grace.' ''\  And  it 
was  declared  by  God  to  be  an  "  everlasting  covenant."J 

Afterwards  when  sin  and  idolatry  had  multiplied,  "  the 
law"  or  dispensation  of  Moses  was  added  to  it,  to  sub- 
serve in  promoting  the  great  ends  for  which  it  had  been 
established  among  men.  Hence  the  Saviour  teaches, 
"  Circumcision  is  not  of  Moses  but  of  the  Fathers." 
John  vii.  22 : — continued  by  him  for  the  perpetuation 
of  the  original  covenant  to  which  it  belonged,  and  to 
which  the  Mosaic  dispensation  was  added  for  special 
reasons. 

Thus  we  trace  back  the  visible  Church  of  God  on 
earth  to  Abraham's  day.  Before  that  period,  God  had 
not  given  to  His  people  a  peculiar  badge  or  visible  sign, 
by  which  they  were  to  be  distinguished  from  others.  He 
had  included  all  under  a  course  of  discipline,  by  which  a 
people  who  were  infants  in  knowledge  would  perhaps  be 

*  Rom.  iv.  11  ;     Rom,  ii.  29. 

t  Rom.  iv.  16.  X  Gcu.  xvii.  7. 


THE  SAME  IN  EVERY  AGE.     "  139 

sooner  taught  his  dislike  to  sin,  from  its  public  punish- 
ment. Instead  of  collecting  the  better  portion  of  man- 
kind into  one  body,  by  calling  them  out  from  among 
the  wicked — His  plan  was  to  drive  out  the  wicked  from 
among  them,  and  thus  preserve  them  from  the  contagion 
of  evil,  at  the  same  time  his  displeasure  at  sin  would  be 
manifest  to  all.  Cain  and  his  wicked  descendants  were 
driven  out  to  a  land  to  themselves  as  exiles.*  And 
when  the  two  races  came  together  afterwards  and  the 
"  sons  of  God  "  intermarried  with  the  wicked,  and  sin 
as  a  consequence  greatly  multiplied,  a  deluge  swept  oiF 
the  ungodly,  leaving  only  righteous  Noah  and  his  family 
on  the  earth. t  And  when  his  descendants  fell  into 
idolatry  and  various  other  sins,  then  Abram  was  called 
out  into  a  different  land  from  them,  to  form  a  separate 
and  distinct  people  for  the  Lord.  And  now  God 
changes  his  mode  of  administration,  but  not  the  prin- 
ciples upon  which  it  is  founded.  Up  to  this  time  He 
had  manifested  his  displeasure  against  sin  by  driving 
out  and  punishing  the  wicked.  Now  and  hereafter  he 
will  exhibit  rather  his  love  of  virtue  by  calling  out  the 
righteous  from  among  the  wicked,  and  forming  them 
into  a  separate  people  under  covenanted  privileges, 
thereby  granting  high  and  peculiar  favors  to  those  who 
shall  love  Him  and  keep  his  commandments.  The  great 
principles  of  His  government,  and  the  end  to  be  secured, 
are  the  same  under  both  methods,  and  ever  must  be  the 
same.  For  God  is  ever  the  same,  and  can  not  change. 
But  He  applies  those  principles  in  the  way  best  adapted 
to  the  age  and  condition  of  the  people  who  are  to  be  af- 

*  Gen.  iv.  chap.  |  Gen.  vi.  chap. 


140  THE  ABRAIIAMIC  COVENANT  CONFIRMED. 

fected  by  them.  Hence  His  outward  and  visible  "  Co- 
venant of  Grace,"  embracing  present  and  future  bless- 
ings to  the  faithful,  begins  with  Abraham. 

It  was  instituted  under  the  following  circumstances. 

The  descendants  of  Noah,  although  they  worshipped 
the  true  God,  had  now  converted  created  objects  into 
deities,  and  the  sun  and  moon,  stars  and  winds,  rocks  and 
rivers  had  become  objects  of  worship  ;  and  these  demand- 
ing no  morality  in  conduct,  the  practice  of  virtue,  and 
the  knowledge  and  worship  of  the  true  God  were  fast 
disappearing  from  among  them.  And  for  the  purpose  of 
preserving  and  transmitting  the  religion  and  worship  of 
the  One  only  true  God,  wath  kindred  subjects,*  Abram 
a  man  of  faith  and  of  the  right  spirit  was  selected  and 
commanded  by  the  Lord  to  leave  his  country  and  kin- 
dred and  go  into  a  land  which  He  vrould  show  unto 
him;  adding — "  And  I  will  make  of  thee  a  great  nation, 
and  I  will  bless  thee,  and  make  thy  name  great ;  and 
thou  shalt  be  a  blessing  ;  and  I  will  bless  them  that 
bless  thee,  and  curse  them  that  curse  thee,  and  in  thee 
shall  all  the  families  of  the  earth  be  blessed."  Gen. 
xii.  1—3. 

Abram  obeyed,  and  "  went  out  not  knowing  whither 
he  w^ent."  Heb.  xi.  8.  And  when  he  came  to  the  land 
of  Canaan,  "  the  Lord  appeared  unto  him  and  said, 
Unto  thy  seed  ayHI  I  give  this  land  ;  and  there  builded 
he  an  altar  unto  the  Lord  who  appeared  unto  him." 
Gen.  xii.  8.  And  w^hen  his  faith  and  obedience  had 
been  more  fully  tested,  and  Abram  was  now  ninety  and 
nine  years  old,  God  ratified  under  the  form  of  a  visible 
*  Joshua  xxiv.  2 — 14  ;  Gen.  xii. 


A  PROMISED  SAVIOUR  INCLUDED.  141 

seal,  all  that  He  had  promised  unto  him,  under  the  so- 
lemn injunction — "  I  am  the  Almiglity  Cfod  :  walk 
before  me,  and  he  tJiou  perfect.  And  I  will  make  mj 
covenant  between  me  and  thee,"  &c.  Gen.  xvii.  1,  2. 
Abram  fell  upon  his  face,  and  God  in  a  summary  man- 
ner reiterated  his  former  promises.  All  of  which  may 
be  considered  as  briefly  comprehended  in  the  7th  verse : 
'-'- 1  ivill  establish  my  covenant  between  me  and  thee,  and 
thy  seed  after  thee,  in  their  generations,  for  an  everlast- 
ing covenant ;  to  be  a  God  unto  thee  and  thy  seed  after 
thee.''  To  be  a  God  unto  us  and  our  descendants,  is  all 
that  we  need,  and  all  that  we  should  desire  in  any  cove- 
nant with  Him.  Such  a  covenant  embraces  all  that  is 
good  for  all  ages  and  all  countries. 

And  to  this  Abram  gladly  gave  his  consent,  by 
submitting  to  a  religious  rite  affixed  as  the  seal  of  the 
arrangement,  in  which  his  name  was  changed  to  Abra- 
ham, because  to  him  was  sealed  the  promise  of  an 
innumerable  seed,  and  he  thus  made  the  father  of  all 
that  believe — "  The  First  and  Head  of  the  Visible  Cove- 
nant of  Grace  embracing  a  promised  Saviour."* 

As  to  the  nature  and  character  of  this  covenant  none, 
we  presume,  can  explain  it  better  than  an  inspired 
Apostle.  And  no  interpretation  will  be  received  of 
higher  authority  than  that  of  the  Apostle  Paul.  He 
tells  us,  first,  that  a  promised  Saviour  was  thereby  co- 
venanted. ''  Now,  to  Abraham  and  his  seed  were  the 
promises  made.  He  saith  not  and  to  seeds,  as  of  many ; 
but  as  of  One,  and  to  thy  seed  lohich  is  Christ.''  Gal. 
iii.  16.     This  he  further  explains  in  the  next  verse  (17,) 

*  Rom.  iv.  11-13. 


142  THE  COVENANT  WITH  ABRAHAM. 

and  calls  it  'Hhe  covenant  that  was  confirmed  before  of 
God  in  Christ.'''  The  promised  Saviour,  was  therefore 
the  grand  feature  in  this  compact,  or  Deed  of  Gift.  The 
Apostle,  next,  informs  us  that  it  is  a  Covenant  of  Grace 
in  which  men  are  justified  by  faith.  ''  Abraham  be- 
lieved God,  and  it  was  counted  unto  him  for  righteous- 
ness." Rom.  iv.  3.  And  in  the  16th  verse,  he  adds, 
"  Therefore  it  is  of  faith  that  it  might  he  hy  grace  ;  to 
the  end  that  the  promise  might  be  sure  to  all  the  seed  : 
not  to  that  only  which  is  of  the  law,  but  to  that  also 
which  is  of  the  faith  of  Abraham,  who  is  the  father  of 
us  all."  So  justification  by  faith  is  another  feature  in 
that  covenant. 

Further,  the  same  Apostle  informs  us  that  Abraham, 
Isaac,  and  Jacob  regarded  the  land  of  Canaan  as  merely 
a  type  of  the  Heavenly  Canaan,  and  that  they  "so- 
journed in  the  land  of  promise  as  in  a  strange  country, 
looking  forward  to  a  city  which  hath  foundations, 
whose  builder  and  maker  is  God."  And  that  they  and 
multitudes  of  their  descendants,  "  all  died  in  faith,  not 
having  received  the  promises,  but  having  seen  them  afar 
oif,  and  were  persuaded  of  them,  and  embraced  them, 
and  confessed  that  they  were  strangers  and  pilgrims  on 
the  earth.  For  they  that  say  such  things,  declare 
plainly  that  they  seek  a  country.  And  truly  if  they 
had  been  mindful  of  that  country  from  whence  they 
came  out,  they  might  have  had  opportunity  to  have  re- 
turned. But  now  they  desire  a  better  country,  that  is, 
an  heavenly.  Wherefore  God  is  not  ashamed  to  be 
called  their  God  ;  for  He  hath  prepared  for  them  a 
city."     Heb.  xi.  9-16. 


THE  COVENANT  OF  GIIACE.  143 

Thus  we  see  the  great  end  and  efforts  of  the  members 
of  the  Abrahamic  covenant,  were  to  reach  the  heavenly 
city.  They  lived  by  faith,  looking  forward  to  that 
spiritual  Jerusalem,  whose  builder  and  maker  is  God ; 
which  He  has  prepared  for  all  "Abraham's  seed  and 
heirs  according  to  the  promise."  Gal.  iii.  29.  Nor  were 
they  disappointed  ;  for  God  is  not  ashamed  of  those 
who  thus  fulfill  his  covenant.  Hence  the  Abrahamic 
covenant  vouchsafed  to  its  faithful  members — a  loromised 
Saviour — justification  hy  faith — and  the  final  possession 
of  heaven. 

And  is  not  this  the  same  which  the  Gospel  covenant 
now  proposes, — the  promised  Saviour  (having  come)  and 
fulfilling  for  those  who  look  back,  precisely  what  He 
did  for  those  who  looked  forward  to  His  coming  ?  And 
does  not  the  Apostle  Paul  expressly  teach  that  the 
Christian  covenant  is  the  continuation  of  this  same  cove- 
nant formed  ivith  Abraham  ?  That  Christ  redeemed  us 
from  the  curse  of  the  law,  that  the  blessing  of  Abraham 
might  come  upon  the  Gentiles  through  Jesus  Christ  ? 
Gal.  iii.  13,  14.  And  that  if  we  are  Christ's,  then  are 
we  Abraham's  seed  and  heirs  according  to  the  promise  ? 
For  neither  the  law,  nor  any  other  power  could  annul 
the  covenant  made  with  Abraham.  Gal.  iii.  15-17. 
Read  the  third  chapter  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Galatians. 

See  first,  the  declaration  that  the  Gospel  was  preach- 
ed unto  Abraham.  "  And  the  Scripture  foreseeing  that 
God  would  justify  the  heathen  through  faith,  yreachcd 
hefore  the  Crospel  unto  Abraham,  saying.  In  thee  shall 
all  nations  be  blessed.  So  they  which  be  of  faith  are 
blessed  with  faithful  Abraham."     Gal.  iii.  8,  9. 


144  ABKAIIAMIC  COVENANT  NOT  ANNULLED. 

See  next,  that  Christ  has  redeemed  us  that  the  bless- 
ing of  Abraham  might  come  upon  the  Gentiles  through 
Jesus  Christ.  "  Christ  hath  redeemed  us  from  the 
curse  of  the  law,  being  made  a  curse  for  us  :  for  it  is 
written,  Cursed  is  every  one  that  hangeth  on  a  tree : 
that  the  blessing  of  Abraham  might  come  on  the  Gen- 
tiles through  Jesus  Christ ;  that  we  might  receive  the 
promise  of  the  Spirit  through  faith."     Gal.  iii.  14,  15. 

Now  mark,  that  this  covenant,  by  which  "  they  who 
are  of  faith,  the  same  are  the  children  of  Abraham,"* 
the  Apostle  affirms  has  not  been  annulled  ;  and  cannot 
be  annulled.  "  Brethren,  I  speak  after  the  manner  of 
men  ;  though  it  be  but  a  man's  covenant,  yet  if  it  be 
confirined^  no  man  disannulletli  or  addetli  thereto.  Now, 
to  Abraham  and  his  seed  were  the  promises  made.  He 
saith  not — and  to  seeds,  as  of  many ;  but  as  of  one,  and 
to  thy  seed  which  is  Christ.  And  this  I  say^  that  the 
covenant  ivas  confirmed  before  ofHod  in  Christ,  the  law, 
ivhich  was  four  hundred  ayid  thirty  years  after,  cannot 
disannul,  that  it  should  make  the  promise  of  none 
effect.''  Gal.  iii.  15,  16, 17.  More  explicit  evidence  of 
the  perpetuation  of  the  Abrahamic  covenant  could  not 
be  given.  Apostolic  declaration  is  supported  by  Apos- 
tolic argument  to  show  that  that  covenant  is  still  in  force. 

Four  hundred  and  thirty  years  after  the  calling  of 
Abraham,  the  "  Law"  was  given  at  Mount  Sinai,  and 
the  Mosaic  Dispensation  then  commenced.  Some  might 
suppose  the  Abrahamic  Covenant  was  then  annulled, 
and  superseded  by  the  Mosaic.  Not  so,  says  the  Apos- 
tle.    The  Law  was  added  in  subserviency  to  the  ends 

■^-  GaL  iii.  7. 


CONTINUED  UNDER  THE  GOSPEL.         145 

for  whicli  the  Covenant  with  Abraham  was  instituted. 
It  was  grafted  on  the  Abrahamic  Covenant  for  a  speci- 
fic object.  "Added,  (to  it)  because  of  transgressions  till 
the  seed  (Christ)  should  come,  to  whom  (or  concerning 
whom)  the  promise  was  made."  Gal.  iii.  19.  That  is, 
the  Dispensation  of  Moses  was  added  to  the  Covenant 
of  Abraham,  to  serve  in  counteracting  the  influence  of 
sin,  and  in  preserving  the  knowledge  and  worship  of  the 
true  God  until  the  coming  of  Christ.  It  shadowed  forth 
and  prepared  the  way  for  the  coming  Saviour  and  his 
more  spiritual  administration.  But  when  the  promised 
Seed  came,  its  work  was  done.  Its  term  of  office  expir- 
ed— having  "waxed  old"  it  passed  away,  leaving  the 
Abrahamic  Covenant  as  it  found  it — in  full  force. 

The  Saviour  came  like  the  rising  sun,  lighting  up  into 
perfect  day  the  dim  twilight  spread  over  this  Covenant, 
and  revealed  to  view  the  beauty  and  glory  of  much  that 
had  remained  unperceived  and  hence  unappreciated.  He 
himself  was  the  grand  object  in  the  foreground  of  the 
picture — in  him  Avas  fulfilled,  and  through  and  by  him 
are  being  fulfilled  all  that  it  promised,  and  all  that  will 
be  needed  to  its  perfect  fulfillment  to  the  end  of  time. 

The  fuller  development  of  its  principles  was  followed 
by  some  change  in  externals^  and  the  mode  of  its  appli- 
cation to  a  more  enlightened  age ;  but  no  change  in  the 
principles  themselves.  Circumcision  has  been  superseded 
by  the  more  comprehensive  rite  of  Baptism;  and  the 
seventh  day  Sabbath  by  the  Lord's  day,  which  embraces 
the  completion  of  the  Redemption  also  with  the  Creation 
of  the  world. 

The  Gospel  Covenant  being  therefore  a  continnation 


IX' 


r 


14G     CIRCUMCISION  SEAL  OF  SPIRITUAL  BLESSINGS. 

of  the  Ahraliamic  Covenant,  more  enlarged  in  its  mode 
of  application  to  our  fallen  race  ;  and  little  children 
circumcised  and  made  its  members  by  law,  it  follows 
that  tbey  must  by  authority  of  the  same  law  be  now  bap- 
tized— their  right  to  membership  having  never  been  re- 
pealed, the  change  of  the  Seal  cannot  deprive  them  oi 
it.  This  will  be  admitted  by  those  who  admit  that  the 
Abrahamic  and  Christian  is  one  and  the  same  Covenant. 
And  that  must  he  admitted  by  all  who  will  apply  them- 
selves to  the  question  until  they  properly  understand  it. 

As  to  the  objection  sometimes  urged,  that  circum- 
cision only  embraced  temporal  blessings  and  the  lineage 
of  Abraham- — one  must  have  read  his  Bible  to  little 
profit,  who  can  seriously  entertain  it.  Are  there  no 
spiritual  blessings  embraced  in  the  following  language  ? 
'^  And  he  (Abraham)  received  the  sign  of  circumcision, 
a  seal  of  the  righteousness  of  the  faith  which  he  had  yet 
being  uncircumcised ;  that  he  might  be  the  father  of  all 
them  that  believe,  though  they  be  not  circumcised,  that 
righteousness  might  be  imputed  to  them  also ;  and  the 
father  of  circumcision  to  them  who  are  not  of  the  circum- 
cision only,  but  who  also  walk  in  the  steps  of  that  faith 
of  our  father  Abraham  which  he  had,  being  yet  uncir- 
cumcised."    Rom.  iv.  11.  12. 

Are  not  the  things  here  specially  pointed  out  spirit- 
iial  ?  Did  Abraham  receive  the  seal  of  merely  temporal 
promises  for  a  temporary  end?  Or  did  he  receive  "the 
seal  of  the  righteousness  of  faith,''  that  he  might  be  the 
spiritual  fat] ler  also  of  true  believers  whether  they  were 
circumcised  or  uncircumcised?  Did  not  the  Apostle 
introduce  these  passages  for  the  special  object  of  show- 


147 

ing  that  circumcision  was  the  seal  of  a  covenant  of 
grace,  by  which  all  true  believers  should  be  regarded  as 
the  spiritual  seed  of  Abraham  ?  And  what  does  "  the 
righteousness  of  faith"  mean  hwt  justification  hy  faith? 
And  if  Abraham  received  the  seal  of  justification  hy 
faith,  could  he  have  received  the  seal  of  a  higher  and 
greater  spiritual  blessing?  Again,  "  The  promise  was 
not  to  Abraham  or  to  his  seed  through  the  law,  but 
throuo-h  the  risihteousness  of  faith."     Rom.  iv.  13. 

The  thing  is  too  plain  to  dwell  upon,  and  the  more  in- 
telligent, in  order  to  escape  the  legitimate  sequences, 
resort  to  the  alternative  of  making  circumcision  mean 
one  thing  to  Abraham,  and  another  and  different  thing 
to  his  posterity.  To  Abraham,  say  they,  "it  was  a  seal 
of  the  righteousness  of  his  faith — but  to  his  posterity 
not  of  faith  but  of  a  certain  covenant." 

Wonderful  discovery  !  A  sign  of  one  thing  to  Abra- 
ham, and  of  another  to  every  one  else !  Was  it  ever 
heard  that,  when  a  grant  was  made  to  certain  persons 
and  the  authoritative  seal  of  the  State  affixed  to  the 
instrument,  it  did  not  confirm  to  all  alike  accord- 
ing to  the  specifications?  God  said,  "I  will  estab- 
lish my  covenant  between  me  and  thee  and  thy  seed  after 
thee."  And  with  Abraham  his  seed  stands  connected 
in  every  specification  made  in  the  grant  ;*  and  the  same 
seal  or  token  is  applied  to  every  one  of  the  party.  If 
it  was  a  seal  of  justification  by  faith,  when  applied  to 
Abraham,  it  was  therefore  the  same  when  applied  to 
Infants. 

Abraham  and  his  seed  are  made  members  of  the  same 
covenant,  signed  with  the  same  seal,  confirming  to  each 

*  Genesis  xvii.  7,  14. 


148  THE  FATHER  OF  THE  FAITHFUL 

the  same  tJiingB.  Who  has  the  power  to  distribute  to 
each  contrary  to  the  terras  of  the  grant  ? 

But  here  refuge  is  again  sought  in  the  attempt  to  draw 
a  distinction  between  the  "  seal"  and  "  token"  of  a  cove- 
nant. "Circumcision,"  say  they,  "was  the  'token'  or 
'mark'  of  the  covenant  with  Abraham's  seed — not  a 
'  seaV  to  them^  but  only  to    Jiim.'' 

Let  us  analyze  this  distinction.  Suppose  you  call  it 
a  '  token,'  or  a  '  mark,'  or  whatever  you  please.  Was  it 
not  the  sign  of  God's  covenant  with  them  ?  And  if  a 
sign  was  it  not  an  autlioritative  sign — a2:>poi'iited  by  Godf 
And  if  an  authoritative  sign  of  the  covenant — what  is 
that  but  a  seal?  AVhat  is  the  seal  of  a  promise  or  con- 
tract but  the  mark  of  an  a^opointed  sign  f 

And  now  if  God  appointed,  as  the  "  token"  or  "  sign" 
of  this  covenant,  the  "  seal  of  the  righteousness  of  faith" 
and  ordered  it  to  be  applied  to  Abraham  and  his  pos- 
terijty  alike,  did  not  the  sign  of  itself  indicate  the  nature 
of  the  covenant  and  include  all  the  parties  under  it,  and 
remind  young  and  old  that  they  must  "  walk  in  the  steps 
of  that  faith  of  their  father  Abraham  which  he  had  being 
yet  uncircumcised  ?"  Rom.  iv.  12.  And  does  it  not 
still  proclaim  to  Jew  and  Gentile  the  power  of  faith  and 
way  of  becoming  the  true  spiritual  children  of  Abraham  ? 

But  here  a  third  effort  to  escape  is  made  under  the 
shelter  of  "faith."  "  Abraham's /azY/i  only^  (say  they) 
made  him  the  father  of  all  believers."  Not  so — writes 
the  Apostle  Paul — "  Abraham  believed  God  and  it  was 
accounted  unto  him  for  righteousness.  .  .  .  And  he  re- 
ceived the  sign  of  circumcision,  a  seal  of  the  righteous- 
ness of  the  faith  which  he  had  yet  being  uncircumcised, 


BECAUSE  HEAD  OF  A  VISIBLE  COVENANT.  149 

that  he  might  be  the  father  of  all  them  that  believe," 
&c.     Rom.  iv.  3.  11. 

Mark,  he  "  received  the  sign  of  circumcision  that  he 
might  be  the  father  of  all  them  that  believe."  The 
Apostle  is  specific  in  giving  the  reason  why  circum- 
cision was  added.  Faith  alone,  did  not  make  Abraham 
the  "  father  of  the  faithful,"  but  the  sign  of  circumcision 
was  ordered,  "  that  he  might  be  the  father  of  all  them 
that  believe."  His  faith  publicly  attested,  by  God  with 
the  sign  and  seal  of  the  righteousness  of  faith,  made  him 
the  father  of  future  believers. 

Abraham's  faith  before  his  circumcision  brought  to 
him  justification^  but  the  power  of  that  faith  was  made 
known  through  circumcision.  His  faith  was  the  ground- 
work, but  the  Divine  attestation  of  a  visible  sign  and 
seal,  placed  him  at  the  head  of  a  Covenant,  by  means  of 
which  the  righteousness  of  faith  is  proclaimed  to  men, 
and  he  made  the  father  of  all  who  believe.  That  is,  cir- 
cumcision pointed  him  out  as  an  example  and  made  him 
the  first  in  the  visible  line  of  God's  people  on  earth. 
He  thus  became  the  head  and  father  of  a  visible  Cove- 
nant of  Grace ;  by  virtue  of  which  he  is  called  by  the 
Apostle  "  The  father  of  us  all." 

Were  it  not  for  circumcision  Enoch,  and  Woah,  and 
others  would  more  properly  be  called  the  prototype  and 
father  of  the  faithful.  For  they  lived  before  Abraham, 
and  "had  the  testimony  that  they  pleased  God,"  Heb. 
xi.  5,  6,  7. 

But  circumcision  was  a  notable  and  significant  sign — 
the  seal  of  a  Covenant  embracing  things  temporal  and 
spiritual,  promising  to  Abraham  an  innumerable  seed — 

13* 


150  GRAND  OBJECT  OP  CIRCUMCISION. 

in  which  the  Apostle  informs  us  a  spiritual  as  well  as  a 
natural  seed  are  included,*  and  thus  he  is  made  the  father 
of  all  true  Christians. 

Hence  by  virtue  of  this  Covenant  Abraham  is  called 
the  "father  of  the  faithful,"  although  Enoch,  and  Noah, 
and  Abel  lived  before  him.  To  their  faith  the  Holy 
Ghost  hath  testified  as  well  as  unto  Abraham's  but  with 
them  that  visible  Covenant  of  Grace  had  not  been  form- 
ed, of  which  Abraham  is  made  the  head,  and  through 
which  all  true  Christians  are  called  "his  children,"  and 
into  which  fathers,  and  mothers,  and  their  little  children 
have  been  received  some  four  thousand  years. 

It  is  true  that  circumcision  did  include  temporal  with 
spiritual  blessings,  but  it  was  administered  to  all  who 
united  themselves  with  the  people  of  God.  Ishmael 
and  his  descendants,  who  never  inherited  any  portion  of 
the  land  of  Canaan,  and  those  purchased  for  servants, 
and  the  tliousands  of  other  iiations  who  from  time  to 
time  became  Jews,  were  all  alike  circumcised.  The 
land  of  Canaan,  as  a  type  and  pledge  of  the  Heavenly 
Canaan,  was  included ;  and  for  the  purpose  of  preserv- 
ing and  transmitting  the  worship  of  the  true  God,  it 
Avas  important  that  they  should  have  a  separate  and  dis- 
tinct country  to  themselves  at  that  period.  But  this, 
and  all  things  of  a  temporary  character,  with  the  legal 
Dispensation  of  Moses  added,  were  subsidiary  to  the 
higher  and  spiritual  ends  of  a  promised  Saviour,  and 
justification  by  faith,  of  which  circumcision  was  the 
si(j7i  and  seal. 

Nor  when  that  which  is  temporary  and  limited  in  a 
*  Rom.  iv.  12.     Rom.  ix  chapter. 


THE  NATURE   OF  A  SEAL.  151 

covenant  expires  bj  its  own  nature  or  limitation,  does 
it  affect  the  validity  of  the  remaining  portion  ?  All  that 
is  permanent  and  unlimited  in  its  character  continues  as 
firmlj  secured  and  the  covenant  as  binding  as  if  no 
part  had  run  out.  In  the  words  of  another,  "A  cove- 
nant, considered  as  a  contract,  or  deed  of  gift,  or  a 
promise  showing  the  purpose  and  plan  of  the  author, 
may  be  made  to-day,  the  items  increased  to-morrow,  and 
the  seal  not  applied  until  the  third  day,  or  some  subse- 
quent period ;  and  yet  whenever  it  is  affixed,  it  covers 
all  the  items  embraced  in  the  covenant. 

"  Some  of  these  items  may  be  temporary  in  their 
nature,  and  expire  by  their  own  limitation,  while  the 
covenant  remains  in  force ;  others  may  be  permanent, 
and  have  no  end ;  still,  the  seal  covers  with  its  sanction 
all  the  various  provisions,  just  so  long  as  by  their  nature 
or  the  original  appointment  they  continue  in  force. 

"Again,  the  seal  may  he  changed^  without  touching 
the  covenant  itself.  Lawful  authority  may  decide  that 
the  old  seal  shall  no  longer  be  used,  and  ordain  that 
another  shall  take  its  place,  transferring  all  its  legal 
force  to  the  substitute.  And  when  this  appointment 
goes  into  effect,  the  new  seal  ratifies  the  covenant  pre- 
cisely as  the  old  one  did,  at  the  time  of  the  transfer.  If 
any  part  of  the  covenant  had  from  any  cause  expired,  if 
any  part  terminated  at  the  very  moment  the  transfer 
was  made,  then  the  new  seal  covers  and  continues  just 
what  the  old  one  would  have  done  had  it  been  continued 
afterwards."* 

Thus  circumcision  covered  all  that  was  contemplated 

*  An  anonymous  pamphlet. 


152  infants'  claims  not  affected. 

and  promised  from  the  calling  of  Abraham  to  the  time 
the  covenant  was  closed  and  the  seal  affixed.  And 
when  the  temporary  items  terminated,  as  in  the  case  of 
the  land  of  Canaan,  the  spiritual  Canaan  typified,  and 
other  blessings  embraced,  still  remained  as  secure  as 
before. 

So  when  Christ,  the  promised  seed,  came  in  the  flesh, 
he  went  on  to  fulfill  the  duties  implied  and  necessary  to 
the  perfection  of  a  covenant  of  grace,  securing  to  men 
salvation  through  faith.  And  every  fulfillment  that 
thus  takes  place,  should  inspire  us  with  greater  confi- 
dence in  that  which  is  yet  to  come.  Confiding  fully  in 
the  promise  that  ''He  will  be  our  God,"  and  make  us 
all  the  spiritual  "children  of  Abraham,"  who  "walk  in 
the  steps  of  the  faith  of  Abraham,"  and  bless  us  with  the 
realization  of  all  that  v/as  expected  from  a  promised 
Saviour  and  an  inheritance  of  the  Heavenly  Canaan. 

And  when  the  seal  of  circumcision  was  chano^ed  for 
that  of  baptism,  then  baptism  sanctioned  all  that  cir- 
cumcision w^ould  have  secured  had  it  been  continued. 

Therefore,  the  membership  of  infants  under  the  New 
is  as  valid  and  binding  as  it  was  under  the  Old.  No 
change  was  made  in  their  case  at  the  time  of  the  abro- 
gation of  the  old  seal ;  there  is  nothing  in  the  nature  of 
the  new,  or  in  the  terms  of  the  covenant,  by  wdiich  it 
could  be  terminated ;  and  who  will  dare  assume  the  re- 
sponsibility to  take  from  them  a  right  which  they  have 
so  long  possessed  ? 

It  has  been  objected  that  baptism  did  not  take  the 
place  of  circumcision  because  they  were  both  practiced 
together  for  some  time   after  the  Gospel  Dispensation 


EECOGNITION  OF  INFANT  MEMBERSHIP.  153 

had  begun.  We  might  as  well  contend  that  the  Chris- 
tian Sabbath  did  not  take  the  place  of  the  Jewish  Sab- 
bath because  both  days  were  kej^t  by  Jewish  believers 
for  some  years  after  the  Gospel  was  preached  and  em- 
braced among  them.  Jewish  Christians  for  a  long 
period  continued  circumcision  and  the  Jewish  Sabbath, 
and  other  rites  of  their  old  religion,  after  they  embraced 
Christianity.*  They  supposed  that  the  Christian  reli- 
gion was  something  to  be  superadded  to  what  they 
already  possessed,  to  perfect  their  own  system  of  reli- 
gion. And  therefore  they  added  the  Lord's  day  to 
their  own  Sabbath,  and  baptism  as  an  additional  rite  to 
their  other  ceremonies.  And  the  continuance  of  cir- 
cumcision itself  proves  that  they  regarded  their  little 
children  as  embraced  in  the  Gospel  Church.  Eor  they 
could  not  have  added  a  system  which  excluded  little 
children  to  one  that  embraced  them,  supposing  the  two 
to  harmonise  and  make  one  whole,  had  they  been 
informed  that  little  children  could  no  longer  be  contin- 
ued in  God's  Church  with  their  believing  parents.  And 
that  circumcision  was  generally  regarded  as  a  religious, 
not  merely  as  a  national  rite,  is  i^laced  beyond  all  doubt  \ 
by  the  fact  that  it  was  urged  by  Jewish  Christians  - 
upon  Gentile  converts  as  necessary  to  their  salvation :  ; 
"Except  ye  be  circumcised  after  the  law  of  Moses,  ye  ' 
cannot  be  saved."     Acts  xv.  1. 

This  happened  some  sixteen  yearsf  after  the  Gospel 
Dispensation  had  been  in  successful  operation,  which 
proves  that  they  still  circumcised  their  children,  and  sup- 

*  Acts  XV.  xxi.     Ireneus  i.  26.     Euseb.  iii.  32. 

f  See  best  chronologers — Hales,  Townsend,  and  others. 


154  HEBREW  CHRISTIANS  ADHERE  TO  MOSES. 

posed  it  to  be  a  necessary  rite  to  salvation.  But  had  in- 
fants been  refused  baptism,  the  nature  of  circumcision 
must  have  been  discussed  and  defined  long  before  this,  in- 
stead of  which  a  Council  of  the  Church  was  held  at  this 
period  in  Jerusalem  to  decide  on  the  authority  of  circum- 
cision in  the  Christian  Church,  and  whether  it  should  be 
imposed  on  Gentile  converts.*  Now  if  they  had  been 
taught  that  little  children  could  not  be  received  into  the 
new  Covenant,  and  that  the  circumcision  which  they  had 
continued  among  them  so  long  in  the  Christian  Church, 
was  only  a  national  badge,  how  could  such  a  difficulty 
have  then  arisen  ? 

We  call  upon  the  opposers  of  Infant  baptism  to  reply. 
The  thing  is  obvious.  Infant  membership  had  been 
continued ;  the  Jews  were  permitted  to  circumcise  and 
to  baptize  ;  and  as  long  as  Jewish  ceremonies  were  made 
subordinate  to  those  more  strictly  Christian,  they  were 
not  proscribed,  because  they  were  not  in  their  spirit 
opposed  to  the  Christian  system.  But  now  undue  im- 
portance is  given  to  them,  and  circumcision  supposed  to 
be  an  essential  part  of  the  religion  of  Christ,  it  is  time 
for  the  Church  in  Council  to  declare  that  it  is  not  a  part 
of,  or  necessary  to  the  Gospel  Dispensation.  These 
Gentile  converts  had  been  baptized,  and  as  a  public  pro- 
fession of  Christ  and  the  initiatory  rite  into  his  Church, 
this  was  sufficient. 

So  Jewish  Christians  long  kept  both  the  Lord's  day 
and  Jewish  Sabbath ;  but  Gentile  believers,  and  those 
who   accepted   the   Gospel  of  Christ  in  its  simplicity, 

*  This  qucetion  Avill  l)e  more  fully  discussed  under  the  Scriptural 
texts  for  Infant  Mcniljcrship.     Acts  xv.  and  xxi. 


CIRCUMCISION  SUPERSEDED  BY  BAPTISM.  155 

kept  only  the  "Lord's  day"  as  the  Christian  Sabbath; 
and  observed  only  baptism  as  the  seal  of  the  Christian 
Dispensation.  Baptism  and  the  Lord's  day  could  not 
be  said  in  point  of  fact  to  take  the  place  of  circumcision 
and  of  the  Jewish  Sabbath  for  those  who  united  the  two 
Dispensations ;  but  to  all,  then  and  now,  who  receive  the 
Gospel,  and  practice  only  its  own  ordinances,  the  Lord's 
day  is  the  Sabbath  instead  of  the  Jewish  Sabbath,  and  j 
baptism  the  initiatory  rite  of  religion  instead  of  circum- 
cision. And  wdiethec  we  choose  to  call  one  the  substitute 
of  the  other  or  not,  baptism  has  succeeded  circumcision, 
as  the  Lord's  day  has  succeeded  the  Jewish  Sabbath, 
and  answers  all  the  sinritual  pioyoses,  Jiolds  the  same 
place  in  the  same  Churchy  while  circumcision  has  passed 
away. 

Circumcision  was  the  door  of  admission  into  the  visi- 
ble Church  of  God  under  the  Patriarchal  and  Mosaic 
Dispensations.     Gen.  xvii.  10  ;    Ex.  xii.   48. 

Baptism  is  the  door  of  admission  under  the  Christian 
Dispensation.     Matt,  xxviii.  19. 

Circumcision  was  the  token  of  God's  covenant  with 
his  ancient  people.     Gen.  xvii.  11. 

Baptism  is  the  same  with  his  people  of  the  present  day. 
Mark  xvi.  16. 

Circumcision  of  the  flesh  was  symbolical  of  the  cir- 
■  cumcision  of  the  heart,  in  the  spirit.     Rom.  ii.  29. 

So  baptism  is  symbolical  of  the  cleansing  and  renew- 
ing of  the  heart  by  the  same  spirit.    Acts  xxii.  16. 

Circumcision  was  the  seal  of  the  righteousness  of  faith. 
Rom.  iv.  11. 

And  '^as  many  as  have  been  baptized  into  Christ! 


156  BAPTISxM,  CHRISTIAN  CIRCUMCISION. 

have  put  on  Christ.  There  is  neither  Jew  nor  Greek, 
there  is  neither  bond  nor  free,  there  is  neither  male  nor 
female ;  for  ye  are  all  one  in  Christ  Jesus.  And  if  ye 
be  Christ's,  then  are  ye  Abraham's,  seed,  and  heirs  ac- 
cording to  the  promise."     Gal.  iii.  27,  29. 

Again. — ''  In  whom  also  ye  are  circumcised  with  the 
circumcision  made  without  hands,  in  putting  off  the 
body  of  the  sins  of  the  flesh  by  the  circumcision  of 
Christ:  buried  with  him  in  baptism."     Col.  i.  11,  12. 

Hence  the  ancient  Fathers  alluding  to  this  text  were 
in  the  habit  of  calling  baptism,  the  "  circumcision  made 
without  hands"  and  "the  circumcision  of  Christ."* 
Justin  Martyn,  who  lived  when  many  were  yet  upon  the 
earth,  who,  as  before  remarked,  had  seen  and  heard  the 
Apostles  with  their  own  eyes  and  ears — tells  us  that 
Christians  put  off  the  body  of  the  sins  of  the  flesh  by 
Christian  circumcision,  i.e.  baptism.  "  We  have  not  re- 
ceived that  circumcision  ivhich  is  according  to  the  flesh,  hut 

that  which  is  sjnritual Aoid  we  have  received  it 

in  ba2Jtism."'\  Again,  ''  We  are  circumcised  hy  bap- 
tism, by  Christ's  circumcision.' '% 

Origen  says,  "  Christ  gives  us  circumcision  by  bajj- 
tism."^  Fidus  hesitated  to  baptize  children  before  the 
eighth  day  after  their  birth,  the  time  at  which  circum- 
cision was  always  administered.  And  Cyprian  to  whom 
the  question  was  referred  with  66  bishops  in  council,  gave 
as  their  judgment  that  it  might  be  administered  before ; 
especially  in  time  of  danger  to  the  child's  life.H     Such 

■'^'  Justin,  Basil,  Chrysostom,  Augustin  and  others. 

f  Dialog,  cum  Tryph,  page  59.  %  Quest,  ad  Orthodox. 

^  Horn.  V.  ""  II  Cypriani  Epis.  Gi. 


AUGUSTINE    AND  INFANT  BAPTISM.  157 

a  question  would  never  have  arisen  had  it  not  been  tha^^ 
baptism  was  regarded  as  having  superseded  circumcision. 
Chrysostom  says,  "  There  was  pain  and  trouble  in  the 
'practice  of  circumcision,  hut  our  circumcision,  I  mean 

the  Grace  of  Baptism,  gives  cure  tvithout  |j>am 

and  has  no  determinate  time  as  that  had,  but  in  the  very 
beginning  of  age,  or  the  middle  of  it,  or  any  other 
time  one  may  receive  this  circumcision  made  ivithout 
hands.' '"^ 

Basil  writes,  '''And  dost  thou  put  off  the  circumcision 
made  without  hands  in  the  putting  off  flesh  ivhich  is 
performed  in  baptism,  when  thou  hearest  our  Lord  him- 
self say — 'Verily,  verily  I  say  unto  you,  except  one  be 
born  of  the  water  and  the  Spirit,  he  shall  not  enter  into 

the  kingdom  of  God?'"  t 

We  need  hardly  add  others,  to  satisfy  any  reasonable 
man  that  the  early  fathers  in  the  Church  believed,  and 
so  understood  St.  Paul  to  teach,  that  baptism  in  spiritual 
things,  had  taken  the  place  and  superseded  circumcision. 
But  we  will  cite  one  more  witness  to  show  not  only  the 
relation  of  the  two  rites  to  each  other,  but  what  was 
the  teaching  of  the  brightest  luminary  of  the  ancient 
Church  in  regard  to  this  whole  subject.  The  celebrated 
Augustine,  bishop  of  Hippo,  after  stating  that  "  Infant 
baptism  was  the  practice  of  the  whole  Church,  not  insti- 
tuted by  councils,  but  ever  in  use  by  Apostolic  authority,"  J 
speaks  of  its  importance  in  the  following  terms:  "We 
may  make  a   true  estimate  how  much  the  sacrament   of 


"■^  Horn.  xl.  f  Oratio  cxhortatoria  ad  baptismum. 

J  Augustin.  cle  Baptismo  contra  Donatistas,  lib.  iv.  chap.  15. 

14 


158  Augustine's  pakallkl  of 

baptism  does  avail  infants,  by  the  circumcision  which 
God's  former  people  received.  For  Abraham  was  jus- 
tified before  he  received  that :  as  Cornelius  was  indued 
with  the  Holy  Spirit  before  he  received  baptism.  And 
yet  the  Apostle  says  of  Abraham  that  he  received  the 
sign  of  circumcision,  a  seal  of  the  righteousness  of  the 
faith,  by  which  he  had  in  heart  believed,  and  it  had 
been  counted  to  him  for  righteousness.  Why  then 
was  he  commanded  to  circumcise  all  his  male  infants  on 
the  eighth  day,  when  they  could  not  yet  believe  with 
the  heart,  that  it  might  be  counted  to  them  for  righteous- 
ness, but  for  this  reason,  because  the  sacrament  itself 
is  of  itself  of  great  import  ?  Therefore  as  in  Abraham 
the  righteousness  of  faith  went  before,  and  circumcision 
the  seal  of  the  righteousness  of  faith  came  after  ;  so  in 
Cornelius  the  spiritual  sanctification  by  the  gift  of  the 
Holy  Spirit  went  before  ;  and  the  sacrament  of  rege- 
neration by  the  laver  of  baptism  came  after.  And  as 
in  Isaac  who  was  circumcised  the  eighth  day,  the  seal  of 
the  righteousness  of  faith  went  before,  and  (as  he  was  a 
follower  of  his  father's  faith)  the  righteousness  itself,  the 
seal  whereof  had  gone  before  in  his  infancy,  came  after  : 
so  in  infants  baptized,  the  sacrament  of  regeneration  goes 
before,  and  (if  they  put  in  practice  the  Christian  reli- 
gion) conversion  of  the  heart,  the  mystery  whereof  went 
before  in  their  body,   comes  after."* 

Such  is  a  summary  of  the  whole  matter  as  received  in 
Augustine's  day. 

First — That  Infant  baptism  was  the  practice  of  the 

•^  AuQfustinns  contrn  Donntistns,  lib.  iv.  c.  ];">. 


CIRCUMCISION  AND  BAPTISM.  159 

universal  Church,  and  admitted  by  all  to  be  of  Apostol- 
ical authority. 

Second — That  it  conveyed  all  the  spiritual  blessings 
of  circumcision,  and  was  therefore  of  great  import. 

And  third — That  it  is  the  seal  of  the  sanctification  of 
the  spirit,  or  justification  by  faith,  as  was  circumcision. 
And  as  circumcision  was  given  to  children  before  they 
could  believe,  so  baptism  is  given  to  children  before  they 
can  believe.  Where  then  is  the  force  of  the  objection. 
Little  children  must  not  be  baptized  because  they  can  not 
believe  ?  Could  the  children  of  Abraham  believe  ?  and 
yet  did  they  not  receive  the  sign  of  circumcision  a  seal 
of  the  righteousness  of  faith,  and  symbol  of  the  circum- 
cision of  the  heart  ?  How  then  can  the  reader  of  the 
preceding  pages,  exclude  little  children  from  baptism  on 
such  a  plea  as  this  ?  And  need  we  prolong  this  chapter 
to  prove  that  baptism  has  superseded  circumcision  and 
secures  to  Christians  and  to  their  little  children  all 
the  spiritual  blessings  of  the  first  seal  ?  We  can  do 
so,  but  surely  no  intelligent  reader  will  deem  it  neces- 
sary.    But  we  write  for  all. 


CHAPTER  VI. 


RELATION  OF  CIRCUMCISION   AND  BAPTISM,  CONCLUDED. 

St.  Paul's  definition  of  circumcision — Exposition  of  tlie  moral  law  under 
Moses — Old  Testament  appealed  to  by  Christ  and  his  Apostles — Transfer 
of  the  kingdom — Branches  of  the  wild  olive  grafted  into  the  good  olive 
ti-ee — Strangers  and  foreigners  made  fellow-citizens  with  the  saints — 
New  and  better  covenant — New  and  old,  comparative  terms — Basis  of 
the  Christian  Church — Gentiles  brought  in  with  Jews — Faith  of  parents 
avail  for  their  children — Hannah,  Nobleman — Woman  of  Canaan — Reli- 
gion always  a  family  thing — Baptism  on  the  faith  of  the  parent — Syriac 
version  of  the  Holy  Scriptm'es. 

It  is  truly  painful  to  witness  the  reckless  manner  in 
which  partisan  writers  often  treat  and  speak  of  circum- 
cision and  the  Patriarchal  and  Mosaic  Dispensations. 
"  Circumcision  (say  they)  was  a  mere  national  badge  by 
which  Abraham's  descendants  were  to  be  distinguished 
from  the  rest  of  the  world,  and  to  remind  them  of  the 
promise  of  the  land  of  Canaan.  And  the  Mosaic  Dis- 
pensation was  a  religio-political  commonwealth  instituted 
for  a  specific  end,  and  temporary  in  its  nature." 

Will  such  permit  inspired  Apostles  and  God's  own 
Son  to  explain  the  character  and  objects  of  these  Insti- 
tutions? Does  St.  Paul  say  that  circumcision  was  a 
mere  national  badge  implying  only  temporary  blessings. 
Hear  him.  "  For  he  is  not  a  Jew,  which  is  one  out- 
wardly ;  neither  is  that  circumcision  tvhich  is  outward 


THE  CIRCUMCISION  OF  THE  HEART.  161 

in  the  flesh.  But  he  is  a  Jew  ivhich  is  one  inwardly  : 
and  circumcision  is  that  of  the  heart,  in  the  Spirit,  and 
not  in  the  letter ;  whose  praise  is  not  of  men  hut  of 
aodr—Uo.  ii.  28,  29. 

Can  language  more  plainly  teach  that  circumcision 
pointed  to  things  spiritual  as  well  as  temporal  ?  Does 
not  the  Apostle  in  these  words,  beyond  all  controversy, 
teach — that  circumcision  is  an  outward  visible  sign  of  \ 
an  inward  spiritual  grace, — to  wit,  the  circumcision  of  ' 
the  heart,  which  is  necessary  to  make  us  the  true  chil- 
dren of  Abraham  ? 

And  did  our  Saviour  regard  that  as  a  mere  national 
institution  to  the  members  of  which  he  said — "  Many 
shall  come  from  the  east  and  from  the  west,  and  shall 
sit.  down  with  Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Jacob  in  the  king- 
dom of  heaven,  but  the  children  of  the  kingdom  shall  he  \ 
cast  outf     Matt.  viii.  11,  12, 

*'  Children  of  what  kingdom  ?"  and  what  connection 
had  it  with  ^'  Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Jacob  in  the  king- 
dom of  heaven,"  but  as  the  visible  part  of  a  kingdom 
begun  here  on  earth  to  prepare  men  for  its  more  perfect 
state  in  heaven,  into  which  Abraham,  and  Isaac,  and 
Jacob  had  already  entered  ?  The  Jews  were  members 
of  this  kingdom  on  earth,  and  the  Saviour  thus  warns 
them  of  the  danger  of  being  excluded,  for  the  want  of 
fitness,  from  its  perfect  state  and  blessings  in  heaven. 

Is  it  more  reasonable  to  conclude,  that  God  called 
out  Abraham  to  a  land  to  himself  to  bestow  on  him  and 
his  descendants  merely  temporal  blessings,  and  to  point 
out  the  lineao^e  of  our  Saviour  throuojh  the  flesh  some 
two  thousand  years  before  he  came — than  for  the  higher 

14* 


162  CHARACTER  OF  ABRAHAM. 

purpose  of  preserving  the  true  religion,'''  and  establish- 
ing a  visible  covenant  that  should  be  a  witness  to  the 
grace  of  God,  and  of  the  fulfillment  of  his  promises  to 
faith  and  obedience,  as  well  as  in  regard  to  the  lineage 
of  Christ  ?  Thus  encouraging  works  of  piety  and  fitting 
men  for  the  kingdom  of  heaven ;  while  at  the  same  time 
proofs  of  the  fulfillment  of  his  promises,  and  of  the 
claims  of  the  Saviour  would  be  accumulating. 

Strange  that  a  covenant  which  testifies  to  justifica- 
tion by  faith,  and  points  out  Abraham  as  the  father  of 
a  spiritual  as  well  as  of  temporal  seed,  and  the  members 
of  w^hich  are  held  up  as  patterns  to  Christians  of  the 
present  day,  should  ever  have  been  supposed,  by  any 
one,  to  be  a  mere  national  or  temporal  institution. 

And  the  more  so,  from  the  fact,  that  to  avoid  the 
idolatry  and  sin  of  his  people,  and  to  fulfill  the  great 
duties  of  religion,  constituted  the  grand  object  for  which 
Abram  was  called  out  from  among  his  people. f  And 
even  as  a  preliminary  to  the  confirmation  of  that  cove- 
nant the  command  was  issued,  "  Walk  before  me,  and 
he  thou  perfect 'j'^X  and  he  commended  afterwards  for 
his  faithfulness  in  training  his  children  in  the  way  of 
the  Lord.  "  I  know  him  (says  God)  that  he  will  com- 
mand his  children  and  his  household  after  him,  that 
they  shall  keep  the  ivay  of  the  Lord,  to  do  justice  and 
judgment;  that  the  Lord  may  bring  upon  Abraham 
that  which  he  hath  spoken  of  him."§  And  his  faith  and 
devotion  were  yet  more  highly  approved  in  the  offering 
up  of  his  son  Isaac,  in  obedience  to  Divine  command. 

•'^  Joshua  xxiv. — Exodus — Romans — Galatians. 

f  Joshua  xxiv.         %  Gen.  xvii.  1.         ^  Gen.  xviii.  19.    Gen.  xxii. 


SPIRITUAL  DUTIES  UNDER  MOSES.  163 

Further — for  the  purpose  of  carrying  out  the  spirit 
and  end  for  which  this  covenant  was  established,  Moses 
was  also  raised  up,  and  additional  laws  and  ceremonies 
added,*  by  which  to  develop  more  clearly  its  character 
and  to  combat  more  successfully  the  influences  of  wicked- 
ness from  within  and  without.  The  moral  law  which 
had  been  written  in  the  hearts  of  men  from  the  begin- 
ning, and  which  lies  at  the  bottom  of  true  religion  and 
all  duty,  becoming  less  intelligible  and  perhaps  almost 
erased  from  the  minds  of  some,  God  commanded  to  be 
written  on  stone,  and  kept  among  them ;  a  more  impos- 
ing ritual  and  outward  form  of  public  worship  was  adopt- 
ed ;  and  such  rules  and  regulations,  civil  and  religious  as 
circumstances  called  for,  introduced  by  Divine  authority. 
And  not  only  did  he  give  them  the  law,  the  spiritual 
nature  of  which  we  presume  no  one  will  call  in  question, 
but  God  also  called  them  "  A  lioly  people  unto  liim- 
8djy  "  For  thou  art  an  holy  people  unto  the  Lord 
thy  God,  and  tlie  Lord  hath  chosen  thee  to  he  a  2:)ecuUar 
people  unto  himself  above  all  the  7iations  that  are  upon 
the  earth.''  And  he  enjoined  duties  accordingly.  "  Hear, 
0  Israel,  the  Lord  our  God  is  one  Lord.  And  thou 
shalt  love  the  Lord  thy  God  tvith  all  thine  heart,  and 
ivith  all  thy -soul,  and  with  all  thy  might.  And  these 
words  which  I  command  thee  this  day  shall  be  in  thine 
heart;  and  thou  shalt  teach  them  diligently  unto  thy 
children,  and  thou  shalt  talk  of  them  ivhen  thou  sittest 
in  thine  house,  and  when  thou  tvalkest  by  the  tvay,  and 
when  thou  liest  down,  and  when  thou  risest  up.''  Deut. 
vi.   4,   5,  6.     Are   these   duties   of  merely   a  national 

"   Gal.  iii.  19. 


164  EXPOSITION  OF  THE  JEWISH  POLITY. 

character,  or  are  they  strictly  spiritual  ?  ^'  Ye  shall  he 
holy,  for  I  the  Loi^d  your  God  am  holy.'"  Levit.  xix.  1. 
Yet  again,  ''  Sanctify  yourselves  therefore,  and  he  ye 
holy  ;  for  I  am  the  Lord  your  0-od"     Levit.  xx.  7. 

Such  are  specimens  of  the  doctrines  and  duties  incul- 
cated under  this  so-called  "  Religio-political  common- 
wealth." God  its  founder  and  the  only  object  to  be  wor- 
shipped— they,  his  peculiar  people,  who  must  love  him 
with  all  the  heart,  soul,  and  strength ;  and  diligently 
teach  their  children  his  statutes,  and  seek  to  be  holy, 
for  their  God  is  holy. 

Now  if  the  moral  law,  or  ten  commandments,  with 
such  expositions  as  these,  do  not  inculcate  a  spiritual 
religion,  will  some  one  tell  us  what  a  spiritual  religion 
is  ?  If  the  religion  of  Christ  be  more  spiritual,  please 
point  out  the  difference,  and  show  in  what  that  difference 
consists.  In  a  word,  did  not  Moses  and  the  Prophets 
teach  the  very  lato  which  Christ  came  to  fulfill  ?  and  in 
rendering  to  it  the  duty  due  from  sinful  men,  open  up 
to  them  the  way  of  justification  by  faith,  by  which 
Abraham  and  all  his  spiritual  seed  become  the  heirs  of 
righteousness  ? 

The  addition  of  a  civil  polity  to  regulate  the  civil 
and  social  relations  of  the  Jews  did  not  destroy  the  spi- 
ritual character  of  their  Church.  The  Apostle  tells  us 
in  specific  terms,  as  before  referred  to,  that  the  law 
which  was  four  hundred  and  thirty  years  after,  could 
not  annul  the  covenant  made  with  Abraham  ;  and  there- 
fore neither  the  addition  nor  removal  of  the  Mosaic 
Economy — its  civil  nor  religious  institutions — destroyed 
the   spiritual  principles   and   life    which   underlay  the 


APPEAL  TO  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT.  165 

superstructure,  and  from  which  the  Mosaic  Economy 
derived  all  its  strength  and  efficacy. 

And  notwithstanding  the  mixed  character  of  civil  and 
religious  regulations  in  the  polity  of  the  Patriarchal 
and  Mosaic  Dispensations  of  the  Church,  it  must  be 
remembered  that  under  that  polity  were  trained  the 
prophets  and  holy  men  of  old,  who  spake  and  wrote 
as  they  were  moved  by  the  Holy  Ghost ;"  that  to  it 
as  the  keeper  of  the  truth  were  committed  the  sacred 
oracles  of  God  ;  and  that  from  it  we  receive  the  canonical 
Scriptures  of  the  Old  Testament  as  the  inspired  word  of 
God. 

And  to  these  writings  did  Christ  and  his  Apostles 
constantly  appeal  in  support  of  their  own  teaching.  In 
the  worship  of  that  Church  did  they  regularly  unite. 
And  to  the  members  of  that  Church  who  would  not 
accept  the  Saviour  as  their  Messiah,  he  said,  "  The 
kingdom  of  God  shall  be  taken  from  you,  and  given 
to  a  nation  bringing  forth  the  fruits  thereof.  What 
fruits  did  he  mean,  but  those  ^'of  righteousness  and 
peace?"  and  what  kingdom  but  the  Church  of  which 
"He  is  the  Head?"* 

Again,  to  the  members  of  the  Jewish  Church  he  said, 
"  Other  sheep  I  have,  which  are  not  of  this  fold ;  them 
also  must  I  bring,  and  they  shall  hear  my  voice,  and  there 
shall  be  one  fold  and  one  shepherd."!  What  fold  was 
this  to  which  he  referred  but  the  Jewish  Church,  and 
what  "other  sheep"  but  converts  among  the  Gentiles? 
And  did  he  not  teach  the  sufficiency  of  that  dispensa- 
tion for  the  salvation  of  men,  in  the  parable  of  the  rich 

*  Col.  i.  18.  t  John  x.   16. 


166  MOSES  AND  THE  PROPHETS. 

man  and  Lazarus,  when  He  informed  the  rich  man  in 
hell  that  Moses  and  the  Prophets  were  sufficient  to  save 
his  brethren  in  this  world  from  coming  to  the  same 
place  ?  The  rich  man,  when  informed  that  Lazarus 
could  not  come  to  him  to  mitigate  his  sufferings, 
besought  Abraham,  "  I  pray  thee,  father,  that  thou 
wouldst  send  him  to  my  father's  house,  for  I  have  five 
brethren,  that  he  may  testify  unto  them,  lest  they  also 
come  into  this  place  of  torment.  Abraham  saith  unto 
him,  they  have  Moses  and  the  Prophets ;  let  them  hear 
them.  And  he  said,  nay  father  Abraham,  but  if  one 
rose  from  the  dead,  they  will  repent.  And  he  said  unto 
him,  If  they  hear  not  Moses  and  the  Prophets,  neither 
will  they  be  persuaded  though  one  rose  from  the 
dead."* 

Now  did  Christ,  in  this  parable,  overrate  the  value  of 
Moses  and  the  Prophets  ?  and  if  not,  did  he  not  teach 
the  sufficiency  of  the  Mosaic  dispensation  for  the  salva- 
tion of  the  people  for  whom  it  w^as  provided  ?  And  does 
he  not  speak  of  this  same  Dispensation,  (including  with 
it  of  course  the  basis  on  which  it  is  grafted)  under  the 
figure  of  a  *•  vineyard,"  and  point  to  the  Jewish  nation 
as  the  husbandmen,  who,  because  of  their  unfaithfulness 
and  wickedness  in  killing  the  son  of  the  Lord  of  the 
vineyard,  (Christ,)  should  therefore  be  driven  out,  and 
the  vineyard  let  out  to  other  husbandmen  ?  Matth.  xxi. 
33-41.  And  does  He  not  call  this  same  vineyard,  ''the 
kingdom  of  God,"  and  say  unto  the  Jews,  "Therefore 
the  kingdom  of  God  shall  be  taken  from  you,  and  given 
to  a  nation  bringing  forth  the  fruits  thereof  ?"t 

-^-  St.  Luke  xvi.  27-31.  f  Matt.  xxi.  43. 


TRANSFER  OF  THE  KINGDOM.  167 

Was  then  this  "vineyard"  and  "kingdom  of  God" 
destroyed  in  passing  into  other  hands,  or  was  it  contin- 
ued and  improved  under  the  management  of  more  faith- 
ful rulers  ? 

Hear  St.  Paul  describe  the  cause  and  manner  of  the 
transfer.  Some  of  the  Jews  were  continued  in  it,  but 
the  great  majority  excluded.  In  describing  the  process, 
he  uses  the  figure  of  an  "olive  tree  and  its  branches." 
The  Jews,  he  calls  the  "  natural  branches  ;"  the  Gentile 
believers,  the  "branches  of  a  wild  olive  tree."  And  he 
cautions  the  Gentile  believers  against  boasting,  and  the 
danger  of  being  broken  off  also,  saying,  "  If  some  of 
the  branches  be  broken  off,  and  thou  being  a  wild  olive 
tree  wert  grafted  in  among  them,  and  with  them  par- 
takest  of  the  root  and  fatness  of  the  olive  tree,  boast 
not  against  the  branches.  But  if  thou  boast,  thou  bearest 
not  the  root,  but  the  root  thee.  .  .  .  And  they  also,  (the 
Jews)  if  they  abide  not  still  in  unbelief,  shall  be  grafted 
in,  for  God  is  able  to  graft  them  in  again.  For  if  thou 
(Gentiles)  wert  cut  out  of  the  olive  tree  which  is  wild  by 
nature,  and  wert  grafted  contrary  to  nature  into  a  good 
olive  tree,  how  much  more  shall  these  which  be  the 
natural  branches  be  grafted  into  their  own  olive  tree?" 
Rom.  xi.  IT,  18-23,  24. 

Now  how  can  the  Jews  be  called  the  "  natural  branch- 
es," and  the  Christian  Church  "their  own  olive  tree," 
from  which  they  had  been  "broken  off  because  of  unbe- 
lief," if  it  be  not  a  continuation  of  their  former  Church 
under  Moses  and  Abraham  ?  Remember,  St.  Paul  is 
addressing  the  members  of  the  Christian  Church  at 
Rome — Gentile  believers   into  whose  hands  chieflv  the 


168  OLIVP]  TREE  AND  ITS  BRANCHES. 

"  kingdom"  had  now  passed.  And  he  calls  the  children 
of  Abraham  its  "natural  branches" — the  Christian 
Church  "their  own  olive  tree,"  from  which  they  had 
been  "  broken  off,"  and  Gentile  believers,  the  "branches 
of  a  wild  olive  tree"  grafted  into  it. 

If  the  covenant  with  Abraham  had  now  ended,  and 
the  Christian  Church  were  an  entire  new  Church,  how 
could  Jewish  believers  be  "grafted  ac/ain'  into  that  to 
which  they  had  never  belonged  ?  and  on  what  ground 
could  it  be  called  "their  own  olive  tree"  from  which  it 
had  been  "broken  off,"  either  as  a  nation  or  individuals? 

If  the  Abrahamic  tree  was  dead  and  rooted  up, 
how  would  you  graft  its  "natural  branches"  into  it 
again,  or  what  "fatness"  would  Gentiles  grafted  into  it, 
derive  from  its  dead  "roots?"  Do  men  graft  living  sci- 
ons into  dead  stocks,  or  can  the  branches  live  if  the 
stock  be  dead  ? 

What  does  the  Apostle  mean,  then,  when  he  calls  the 
Christian  Church  the  "olive  tree"  from  which  unbeliev- 
ing Jews  were  "broken  off,"  and  believing  Christians 
are  "grafted"  into  it,  and  tells  us  that  the  Jews,  its 
"natural  branches,"  if  they  abide  not  in  unbelief,  shall 
be  grafted  into  it  again?"  What  but  the  tree  planted 
in  the  days  of  Abraham,  rooted  in  the  promise  of  Christ 
Jesus,  nourished  by  patriarchs  and  prophets,  and  con- 
tinuing to  live  and  to  grow ;  and  which  is  now  waving  its 
branches  over  every  part  of  Christendom,  ready  to  re- 
ceive returning  Israel  and  every  other  nation  desiring  to 
partake  of  its  inexhaustible  fatness  of  a  Covenanted 
Saviour  ?  And  were  not  little  children  grafted  into  this 
tree  from  the  beginning  ? 


SAINTS    AND  HOUSEHOLD  OF  GOD.  169 

We  could  hardly  frame  testimony  more  full  and  clear 
to  certify  that  the  Christian  Church  is  a  continuation  of 
the  Abrahamic  Covenant ;  and  hence,  the  continuation 
of  infant  membership. 

It  is  unnecessary  to  attempt  to  prove  more  clearly  to 
the  intelligent  reader,  that  the  Christian  scheme  is  the 
continuation  of  the  religion  of  the  Old  Testament,  more 
fully  developed  and  clearly  understood.  But,  for  those 
who  need  line  upon  line,  additional  proof  of  the  same 
will  be  found  in  the  fact,  that  the  Gentiles  were  called 
by  the  Apostles  "  aliens  and  strangers  ;"  and  the  Jews 
"saints,"  and  "Israel,"  and  the  "  household  of  God." 
St.  Paul  writes  to  the  Ephesian  converts,  "  Therefore 
ye  are  no  more  strangers  and  foreigners ;  but  fellow- 
citizens  with  the  sa,ints,  and  of  the  household  of  God." 

Now,  why  were  the  terms  "aliens"  and  "strangers" 
applied  to  the  Gentiles,  and  the  Jews  called  "  saints," 
and  the  "  household  of  God,"  with  whom  the  Gentile 
strangers  were  made  "fellow-citizens,"*  but  because  of 
the  fact,  that  Gentile  Christians  were  brought  into  the 
kingdom  of  the  Jews,  which  was  continued  under  the 
Christian  dispensation,  but  so  reformed  and  improved 
that  unbelieving  Israel  was  excluded  and  "broken  off," 
and  believing  Gentiles  brought  in  and  grafted  in  their 
places  ? 

And  for  this  end,  the  Apostle  tells  us,  the  "  middle 
wall  of  partition"  between  Jews  and  Gentiles  had  been 
broken  down,  that  they  who  were  without  might  be 
brought  in,   by   the   blood  of  Christ.     For   "  in    time 

•■^  Read  the  whole  chapter,  Ephes.  ii. 

15 


170  BASTS  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN  CIIURCIT. 

past,"  he  writes  to  Gentile  Christians,  "Ye  were 
without  Christ,  being  aliens  from  the  commonwealth 
of  Israel,  and  strangers  to  the  covenants  of  promise, 
having  no  hope,  and  without  God  in  the  world :  but 
now,  in  Christ  Jesus,  ye  who  sometime  were  far  off,  are 
made  nigh  by  the  blood  of  Christ.  For  he  is  our  peace, 
who  hath  made  both  one,  and  hath  broken  down  "the 
middle  wall  of  partition  between  us  ;  having  abolished 
in  his  flesh  the  enmity,  the  law  of  commandments  con- 
tained in  ordinances ;  for  to  make  in  himself  of  twain 
one  new  man,  so  making  peace."  Ephes.  ii.  11-15. 
That  is,  the  law  and  ordinances  by  which  were  secured 
to  the  Jews  superior  privileges  over  other  nations  are 
now  deprived  of  their  exclusive  power,  and  set  at  naught, 
and  the  way  opened  to  all  to  come  in  and  enjoy  equal 
favors  with  them.  So  that  the  faithful  of  other  nations, 
uniting  with  the  faithful  of  the  Jews,  might  make  "  one 
new  man"  in  Christ  Jesus.  Not  by  the  Jews  going  out  to 
the  Gentiles,  but  by  the  Gentiles  coming  in  to  the  Jews, 
and  taking  their  stand  with  them  on  the  basis  of  the 
covenant  of  grace  formed  with  their  father  Abraham. 
Therefore  the  "  new  man"  formed  in  Christ,  does  not 
mean  a  new  and  independent  Church  in  an  absolute 
sense,  then  begun,  but  a  union  of  the  faithful  of  other 
nations  with  the  faithful  of  Israel  in  their  covenant  pri- 
vileges, to  be  trained  under  the  teachings  of  apostles 
and  prophets. 

And  that  such  was  the  basis  of  union,  and  order  of 
process  in  the  organization  of  the  Christian  Church,  is 
a  historical  fact  as  well  as  a  divine  doctrine.  Not  only 
to  the  Jews  '^pertained  the  adoption^  and  the  glory,  and 


MOSES  SUPERSEDED  BY  CHRIST.  171 

tlie  covenants,  and  the  giving  of  the  law,  and  the  services 
af  God,  and  the  j^^omises'''^ — but  among  them,  and  of 
them  was  formed  the  first  Christian  Church — and  while 
they  still  regarded  themselves  members  of  the  Jewish 
Church,  they  received  Christ  as  their  promised  Mes 
siah,  who  had  come  to  fulfill  and  perfect  what  was  begun 
under  their  fathers. f  And  when  Gentile  converts  were 
brought  in  among  them,  and  it  became  generally  known 
that  they  were  to  enjoy  equal  privileges  with  them 
under  Christ,  it  was  an  unsettled  point  whether  they 
should  observe  the  peculiar  rites  of  the  Jewish,  as 
well  as  of  the  Christian  Church. |  This  of  itself  proves, 
that  these  "aliens"  were  carried  into  the  "house- 
hold" of  the  Jews;  and  the  branches  of  the  wild  olive 
tree  hence  grafted  among  the  branches  of  "  the  good 
olive  tree."§  For  as  yet  they  did  not  understand  that 
the  "new  and  better  covenant"  of  the  Gospel  Avas  to 
supersede  that  of  Moses,  which  had  now  served  its  pur- 
pose, and  having  "  waxed  old  was  ready  to  vanish 
away II" — leaving  only  the  Abrahamic  covenant  upon 
which  to  graft  the  "new."  And  in  which  there  shall 
be  neither  Jew  nor  Greek,  and  instead  of  circumcision, 
baptism  shall  certify  outwardly  "  Abraham's  spiritual 
seed  and  heirs,  according  to  the  promise. "1[  For,  writes 
the  Apostle  Paul,  "  as  many  of  you  as  have  been  bap- 
tized into  Christ,  have  put  on  Christ.  There  is  neither 
Jew  nor  Greek,  there  is  neither  bond  nor  free,  there  is 
neither  male  nor  female,  for  ye  are  all  one  in  Christ 
Jesus.     And  if  ye  be  Christ's,  then  are  ye  Abraham's 

■^  Rom.  ix.  4.  f  Acts  ii.  and  iii.  J  Acts  xiii.  xv.  xxi. 

^  Acts  XV.  II  lleb.  viii.  1.'].  ^  Gal.  iii.  27-29. 


172  A  NEW  AND  BETTER  COVENANT. 

seed  and  heirs  according  to  the  promise."   Gal.  iii.  27, 
28,  29. 

After  reading  this  it  couhl  hardly  have  been  a  matter 
of  doubt  among  the  Galatians,  whether  the  Christian 
dispensation  was  to  supersede  that  of  Moses,  and  was 
designed  to  carry  out  and  perfect  the  promise  made  to 
Abraham ;  and  that  by  baptism,  instead  of  circum- 
cision, we  put  on  Christ,  through  whom  all  are  made 
the  children  of  Abraham,  without  regard  to  nation  or 
condition  of  race. 

Thus  history  and  doctrine  explain  each  other,  and 
unite  their  strength  in  testifying  to  the  perpetuation  of 
the  Abrahamic  covenant,  and  infant  membership  under 
the  Gospel. 

As  to  the  objection  made  on  the  ground  that  the 
Gospel  covenant  is  called  a  "new  and  better  covenant," 
and  therefore  different  from  the  "  old,"  the  reader  need 
only  refer  to  the  passages  in  both  the  Old  and  New 
Testaments,  to  convince  him  that  the  comparison  is 
made  between  the  Mosaic  and  Christian  covenants — not 
the  Christian  and  Abrahamic.  "  Behold  the  days 
come,  saith  the  Lord,  when  I  will  make  a  new  covenant 
Avith  the  house  of  Israel  and  with  the  house  of  Judah  : 
not  according  to  that  I  made  with  their  fathers  in  the 
day  when  I  took  them  by  the  hand  to  lead  them  out  of 
the  land  of  Egypt,"  &c. — Ileb.  viii.  8,  9.*  The  time, 
when  they  were  "led  out  of  the  land  of  Egypt"  was  the 
period  at  which  Moses  was  called  to  act,  some  430  years 
after  the  calling  of  Abraham.  And  hence  the  Gospel  is 
called  a  "  new  and  better  covenant"  in  comparison  with 

■^  Jereniuih  xxxi.  .*!2. 


COMPARATIVE  TERMS.  173 

that  made  with  Moses.  The  terms  ''new"  and  "old"  are 
often  used  in  a  comparative  sense.  For  instance,  the  Co- 
rinthian Church  is  exhorted  to  "  purge  out  the  old  leaven" 
that  it  may  be  a  "new  lump."*  Not  to  go  to  work 
and  found  a  new  Church,  but  to  cleanse  and  purify  the 
old  one.  Purge  it  of  offending  members  and  erroneous 
doctrines,  and  then  it  would  be  reformed  into  a  "  new 
body"  or  "lump."  As  an  altered  or  amended  consti- 
tution of  a  state  is  called  a  "new  constitution;"  or  a 
kingdom  to  which  new  domains  have  been  added,  and 
in  jvhich  ncAV  laws  are  introduced  and  other  changes 
made,  is  by  liberty  of  speech  called  a  "  new  kingdom." 
So  the  Gospel  Dispensation  is  called  a  "new"  and  a 
"  better  covenant,  which  was  established  on  better 
promises"  than  Moses,  "  who  served  unto  the  example 
and  shadow  of  heavenly  things." 

The  same  principle  applies  to  the  use  of  the  term 
"build,"  and  other  forms  of  speech.  As  when  the 
Apostle  Paul  tells  the  Ephesian  elders  the  word  of 
God's  grace  is  able  to  "build"  them  up.  Acts  xx.  32. 
By  which  he  does  not  necessarily  imply  the  beginning, 
but  rather  the  continuing,  of  that  which  had  already 
been  commenced.  So  when  our  Saviour  said  to  Peter, 
"Upon  this  rock  I  will  build  m}^  church, "f — found 
the  Christian  Dispensation — he  did  not  necessarily 
imply  the  beginning  of  everything  pertaining  to 
church  organization — that  he  would  originate  an 
entirely  new  thing,  never  before  known — but  build  up 
the  new  dispensation  under  which  the  Church,  which 
had  been  in  existence  many  centuries,  was  now  to  be 

•--  1  Cor.  V.  1.  f  Matt.  xvi.  18. 

15* 


174  ZION  IMPPtOVEB  AND  ENLARGED. 

continued  until  perfected.  "  The  Redeemer  had  come 
to  Zion,"*  and  would  build  her  up  under  a  more  efficient 
reign.  He  will  now  set  up  a  kingdom  (or  government) 
that  shall  never  be  destroyed.  ^'  The  gates  of  hell  shall 
not  prevail  against  it."t  "  It  shall  stand  forever."{ 
^'  Zion  shall  now  arise  and  shine,  for  her  light  is  come, 
and  the  glory  of  the  Lord  is  risen  upon  her."§  The  day 
has  dawned  in  which  "  the  Gentiles  shall  come  to  her 
light,  and  kings  to  the  brightness  of  her  rising."  "  The 
forces  of  the  Gentiles  shall  come  as  a  cloud,  and  as 
doves  to  her  windows,  and  shall  know  the  Lord  her 
Saviour  and  Redeemer,  the  mighty  one  of  Jacob. "§ 

Thus  through  the  shadow  of  good  things  to  come,  the 
voice  of  Prophecy  unites  with  that  of  Christ  and  his 
Apostles  in  proclaiming,  instead  of  the  destruction  of  Zion 
and  a  new  and  distinct  Church  in  her  place,  that  her 
Redeemer  would  come  to  her  assistance  and  revive  her ; 
that  he  would  enlarge  her  borders,  and  exalt  her  gran- 
deur beyond  that  of  her  first  glory. 

And  now  in  accordance  with  her  enlarged  sphere  and 
more  fully  developed  character,  means  of  grace  and  aids 
to  faith  are  adopted.  The  services  of  Moses  have  been 
changed  into  a  more  simple  and  spiritual  worship,  and 
the  bloody  rite  of  circumcision  into  Christian  baptism, 
which  can  be  applied  without  distinction  to  male  and 
female,  to  Jew  and  Gentile,  to  all  classes — even  to  in- 
fants in  the  beginning  of  life ;  and  the  sooner  they  are 
brought  into  the  nursery  of  the  Church,  and  the  more 
diligently  they  are  trained  in  its  duties  and  doctrines, 

---  Lsaiah  lix.  20.  f  Matt.  xvi.  18. 

%  Daniel  i.  14.  ^  Isaiah  ch.  Ix. 


INFANTS  (TNdER  both  t)ISPENSATlONS.  175 

as  the  foster  children  of  Christ,  and  thus  truly  *'  brought 
up  in  the  nurture  and  admonition  of  the  Lord,"  the  bet- 
ter for  them,  and  for  the  cause  of  our  common  Chris- 
tianity. 

Religion  always  has  been  and  always  should  be,  a 
family  thing ;  and  to  object  to  it  because  little  children 
cannot  believe,  is  to  object  to  the  -wisdom  of  God's  gov- 
ernment of  his  people  in  all  past  ages.  For  they  ever  have 
been  included  with  their  parents  in  covenanted  blessings 
with  God,  and  need  as  much  the  nurture  of  the  Church 
under  the  Gospel  as  they  did  under  the  Law.  And  the 
very  same  reasons  assigned  for  excluding  them  from  the 
one  would  have  excluded  them  from  the  other.  Lifants 
could  not  of  themselves  have  entered  into  covenant 
relations  under  Abraham,  nor  were  they  capable  of 
exercising  the  faith  and  inward  graces  of  circumcision 
any  more  than  they  are  those  of  baptism. 

Both  rites  were  based  alike  on  faith.  Circumcision 
was  the  symbol  of  the  circumcision  of  the  heart — the 
badge  of  God's  people — the  sign  and  seal  of  the  right- 
eousness of  faith.  And  yet  it  was  given  to  little  chil- 
dren only  eight  days  old.  Baptism  means  no  more, 
and  yet  it  is  denied  to  little  children  because  they  can- 
not believe  !  And  the  oft-repeated  quotation — as  oft 
abused  as  quoted  in  such  a  connection — is  made,  "  They 
which  are  of  faith,  the  same  are  the  children  of  Abra- 
ham,"* as  if  any  one  now  doubted  that  by  faith.  Gen- 
tiles as  well  as  Jews  are  "  blessed  with  faithful  Abra- 
ham." But  does  this  exclude  their  children  from  being 
blessed  likewise  as  was  Abraham's,  and  annul  the  doc- 

^  Gal.  iii.  7-9. 


176  FAITH  OF  PARENTS  AVAIL. 

trine  so  frequently  taught  in  the  Holy  Scriptures,  that 
God  will  show  mercy  upon  the  children  of  those  who 
love  him,  "  even  upon  children's  children  of  such  as 
keep  his  commandments?"* 

We  would  ask  of  those  who  suppose  the  father's  faith 
imparts  no  benefit  to  his  child — if  they  have  never  read 
what  the  faith  of  Hannah  did  for  Samuel  ?  and  the  faith 
of  the  nobleman  in  the  Gospel  for  his  son  at  the  point 
of  death  ?  and  the  faith  of  the  woman  of  Canaan  for  her 
daughter  vexed  w^ith  the  devil,  and  other  like  examples  ? 
If  so  why  try  to  deprive  little  children  of  all  the  advan- 
tages thus  secured  to  them  under  Gospel  grace  ? 

From  circumcision  alone,  are  derived  the  following 
arguments  in  favor  of  Infant  baptism  : 

1.  The  analogy  of  the  office  held  by  baptism  and  cir- 
cumcision. Baptism — as  an  initiatory  rite  holds  the 
same  place  under  the  new,  which  circumcision  did  under 
the  old. 

2.  The  perpetuity  of  the  Abrahamic  covenant  proves 
that  baptism  holds  the  same  place,  in  the  same  Church, 
and  fulfills  the  same  spiritual  ends,  while  circumcision 
has  passed  away. 

3.  The  writings  of  the  most  celebrated  of  the  ancient 
fathers  teach,  that  in  things  spiritual,  baptism  was  re- 
garded by  primitive  Christians  as  having  taken  the 
place  of  circumcision. t 

4.  In  point  of  fact,  baptism  did  supersede  circum- 
cision in  the  progress  of  the  Christian  Church.  For 
both  being  practised  together  for  some  time,   circum- 

■5^  Deut.  X.  XX.  XXX.     Ps.  ciii.  cxii.     Rom.  xi. 

f  See  Justin  Martyr,  Origen,  Chrysostom,  Augustine  and  others. 


BAPTISM  SUPERSEDES  CIRCUMCISION.  177 

cision  gradual!}''  ceased,  and  baptism  was  continued  and 
by  a  decision  of  a  council  declared  to  be  sufficient  under 
the  Gospel  Dispensation.* 

Now,  in  addition  to  this  independent  line  of  proof, 
remember  that  we  have  traced  up  through  history  the 
practice  of  baptizing  infants  to  the  Apostolic  age — and  to 
the  middle  of  that  age,  when  family  baptisms  are  re- 
corded as  if  as  much  a  matter  of  course,  as  individual 
baptisms.  The  names  of  the  heads  only  of  the  families 
are  mentioned,  and  their  faith  only  specified.  We  read  in 
the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  of  a  missionary  visit  of  St. 
Paul  and  some  of  his  brethren  with  him  to  Philippi, 
where  they  spend  several  days  and  pass  through  some  ex- 
citing scenes,  during  which  time  it  is  recorded  that  two 
baptisms  took  place,  and  only  two ;  and  both  of  them 
of  whole  families.  But  no  names  are  given  besides  of 
the  heads  of  each. 

This  does  not  look  like  the  report  of  a  missionary 
tour  by  those  who  allow  only  adults  to  be  baptized. 
For  it  would  be  very  remarkable,  in  the  first  place,  that 
two  whole  families,  and  no  others,  should  be  the  first 
fruit  of  such  an  eftbrt.  And  in  the  second,  that  no 
names  but  those  of  the  parents  should  be  given,  if  the 
children  were  all  grown  up  and  baptized  on  their  own 
personal  faith. 

But  admit  the  children  to  be  minors,  and  these 
Apostles  accustomed  to  receive  parents  and  their  little 
ones  together  into  the  Church,  then  such  a  record  would 
be  usual ;  and  to  read  it,   "  Lydia  and  her  family,    and 

■^'  Acts  XV. 


178  SYRIAC   VERSION. 

the  jailer  and  all  his  were  baptized,"*   would  be  in  ac- 
cordance with  what  we  would  anticipate. 

And  accordingly  the  Syriac  version  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment reads  '■'  Lydia  and  her  childreyi."'  "  The  jailer 
ivith  all  his  children.''  And  be  it  remembered  that  this 
version  was  in  use  soon  after  the  death  of  St.  John,  and 
before  it  had  been  determined  whether  several  of  the 
Epistles  in  our  present  canon  with  the  Apocalypse,  should 
be  received  into  it  or  not.  And  this  is  the  exclusive 
version  of  the  Christians  of  all  Syria  and  the  East. 
And  although  adopted  without  the  labor  and  care  given 
to  the  settlement  of  our  canon,  it  contains  the  essentials 
of  Christian  life  and  is  spoken  of  in  the  highest  terms  of 
approbation  by  Christian  scholars  capable  of  appre- 
ciating it.f  Michaelis  pronounces  it  to  be  the  very  best 
translation  of  the  Greek  for  elegance  and  fidelity  that 
he  had  ever  seen.  It  reads,  "  Lydia  and  her  children  " 
— "  The  jailer  with  all  his  children" — and  "the  chil- 
dren of  Stephanas."  And  all  who  use  it,  like  all  the 
ancient  Churches  in  the  world,  baptize  little  children. 


*  Acts  xvi. 

f  See  Home,  and  writers  generally  on  the  Syriac  scriptures. 


CHAPTER  VII. 


TESTIMONY   OF   THE    HOLY   SCRIPTURES. 

The  Grand  Commission  to  the  Apostles  to  baptize  all  nations — True  prin- 
ciples of  Interpretation — Infants  had  been  always  members  of  the  Church, 
and  no  restriction  now  made  in  regard  to  them — Jewish  practice  with 
Proselytes — Talmud  and  Mishna — Objection  to  baptizing  before  teach- 
ing, answered — The  Church  a  School — Objection  to  the  want  of  faith  in 
little  Children,  answered — Christ's  treatment  of  little  children  shows  they 
were  not  to  be  regarded  as  ''aliens  and  strangers"  to  his  kingdom — True 
rendering  "of  such  is  the  kingdom  of  God" — The  promise  to  children  re- 
peated in  the  first  sermon  under  the  Gospel  Commission — Family  bap- 
tisms— Lydia  and  her  children,  the  Jailer  and  all  his,  and  the  family  of 
Stephanus — Meaning  of  oixoi  "house" — In  the  absence  of  demonstra- 
tion, the  GREATER  PROBABILITY,  the  law  of  actiou — Claims  of  duty 
between  an  old  established  rite,  and  supposed  error. 

Having  traced  the  practice  of  baptizing  the  infant 
children  of  believers  up  into  the  Apostolic  age,  and 
shown  from  the  history  and  teaching  of  the  Primitive 
Church,  that  in  the  first  generation  after  the  Apostles, 
Christians  baptized  infant  children,  and  believed  that 
the  Apostles  did  the  same ;  and  having  shown  that 
baptism  has  taken  the  place  of  circumcision,  hence 
infant  baptism  the  place  of  infant  circumcision;  let  us 
now  see  whether  the  Holy  Scriptures  confirm  our  con- 
clusions by  more  direct  teaching  ?  And  we  will  begin 
with  the  first  recorded  authority  for  baptizing  in  the 
name  of  Christ,  in  the  sacred  record. 


180  THE  GRAND  COMMISSION. 

On  a  mountain  in  Galilee  were  met  together  the 
eleven  disciples  of  our  Lord,  by  his  own  appointment, 
made  after  his  resurrection.  ^'And  Jesus  came  and 
spake  unto  them,  saying,  All  power  is  given  unto  me  in 
heaven  and  in  earth." 

Matt,  xxviii.  19,  20. — "  G-o  ye  therefore  and  teach 
(disciijle)  all  nations^  haiHizing  them  in  the  name  of  the 
Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Crhost.  Teach- 
ing them  to  observe  all  things  ivhatsoever  I  have  com- 
manded you :  a7id  lo,  I  am  ivith  you  aUvay,  even  unto 
the  end  of  the  world.'' 

This  is  the  Grand  Commission  under  which  the  Apos- 
tles were  to  act  in  planting  the  Christian  .  Church. 
They  were  to  tarry  in  Jerusalem  until  baptized  by  the 
Holy  Ghost,  and  then  commence  in  that  same  city  the 
momentous  work  herein  assigned  them.  But  how  did 
they  understand  their  commission  ?  This  is  the  point 
for  us  to  settle.  The  language  in  which  it  is  couched 
seems  to  this  age  rather  general.  But  to  them,  no 
doubt,  was  sufficiently  definite.  Why  more  definite 
to  them  than  to  us  ?  Because  of  previous  instruction, 
and  their  acquaintance  with  circumstances  of  which  we 
are  ignorant.  We  say  ignorant,  unless  we  will  examine 
and  learn  the  usages,  manners,  and  laws  of  the  Jews  at 
that  time,  together  with  the  peculiar  circumstances  un- 
der which  this  commission  was  issued. 

This  brings  us  to  that  most  important  of  all  laws  in 
the  interpretation  of  the  Holy  Scriptures,  or  of  any 
other  ancient  writing,  and  to  which  we  have  before 
alluded.  That  is,  to  make  ourselves  acquainted,  as 
far  as  possible,  witli  all  the  circumstances  and  influences 


OBVIOUS  RULE  OF  INTERPRETATION.  181 

under  which  everything  was  said  and  done.  To  study 
the  manners,  customs,  and  peculiarities  of  tlie  people, 
and  endeavor  to  place  ourselves  in  the  midst  of  the  same 
age,  and  collect  around  us  all  the  circumstances  and 
influences  by  which  the  writer  or  speaker  was  at  the 
time  affected. 

In  this  commission  no  exception  is  made  to  nation, 
person,  age,  or  sex.  ''  Go  ye,  therefore,  and  disciple  all 
nations,  baptizing  them  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  and 
of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost."  But  inasmuch 
as  no  age  is  specified,  the  question  has  been  raised 
whether  he  intended  to  include  the  young  children 
or  not.  The  command  to  "disciple  all  nations," 
(^^aOyjfsvaaYs  Ttavta  ta  sOvr,.)  translated  in  our  version, 
"teach  ail  nations,"  seems  not  to  be  sufiiciently  definite 
to  satisfy  the  minds  of  many  that  young  children  are 
included.  But  before  entering  on  a  philological  inquiry, 
let  us  first  try  this  passage  by  the  principle  of  interpre- 
tation to  Avhich  w^e  have  just  alluded,  and  see  how, 
according  to  that  plain  and  obvious  rule,  the  Apostles 
must  have  understood  their  commission. 

In  giving  directions  or  issuing  a  command,  certain 
things  are  always  taken  for  granted  as  being  well 
known,  and  we  only  aim  to  be  explicit  enough  to  be 
clearly  understood.  For  instance,  a  messenger  is  sent 
to  the  post-ofiice ;  the  order  issued  is,  "  Go  and  bring 
my  papers,"  or  simply,  "  Go  to  the  post-office."  The 
messenger  goes  and  brings  letters,  newspapers,  and 
pamphlets ;  and  he  acts  in  accordance  with  the  inten- 
tion of  him  who  sent  him :  although,  perhaps,  he  simply 
told  him  "  to  bring  his  papers,"  or  merely  to  "go  to 
16 


182  KNO^VLEDGE  OF  THE  CIRCUMSTANCES. 

the  230st-office."  Again,  the  merchant  tells  his  clerk  to 
collect  certain  debts,  but  does  not  tell  him  to  carry  with 
him  the  accounts  or  give  receipts,  etc. :  these  are  taken 
for  granted  as  known  to  be  embraced,  and  necessary  to 
the  execution  of  his  orders.  And  thus  w^e  might  cite  nu- 
merous examples,  in  which  much  is  generally  taken  for 
granted  in  all  kinds  of  commissions  and  orders. 

Now  put  a  novice,  unaccustomed  to  either  of  the 
above  duties,  in  the  place  of  one  or  both  of  these  indi- 
viduals, and  he  would  not  execute  the  orders  thus  given. 
Why  not  ?  Because  things  are  taken  for  granted  in 
which  he  has  never  been  instructed.  And  so,  many 
things  are  often  implied  in  "one  age,  that  are  not 
known  to  following  ages ;  and  orders  and  instructions 
then  given,  or  allusions  made,  are  not  understood,  or 
are  misapprehended  in  following  years,  because  things 
then  taken  for  granted,  or  the  circumstances  under 
which  they  were  spoken,  are  unknown. 

And  hence  it  is,  we  find  many  things  in  Latin  and 
Greek  authors,  and  in  the  Holy  Scriptures  likewise, 
which  are  perfectly  unintelligible  to  us,  till  we  learn  that 
certain  usages,  laws,  &c.,  prevailed  in  those  countries 
during  that  age.  For  instance,  it  is  recorded  by  the 
.Evangelists,  (Matt.  ix.  17,  Mark  ii.  22,  and  Luke  v.  37, 
88,)  "that  if  we  put  new  wine  into  old  bottles,  the  bot- 
tles will  break  and  the  wine  run  out,  but  if  we  put  it 
into  new  bottles  both  will  be  preserved."  IIow  shall 
we  interpret  this  passage  without  some  knowledge  of 
the  nature  of  the  bottles  used  in  the  Apostolic  age  ? 
So  far  as  the  bottles  of  this  age  are  concerned,  those 
tliat  that  have  been   proved  by  use  are  more  to  be  de- 


NECESSARY  FOR  CORRECT  INTERPRETATION.      183 

pended  on  than  new  ones.  But  so  soon  as  we  learn 
tliat  the  bottles  used  in  those  days  were  made  of  the 
skins  of  animals,  and  "that  when  those  skins  became  dry 
and  old  they  lost  their  elasticity,  and  would  not  distend 
sufficiently  to  allow  for  the  fermentation  of  their  new 
wines,  we  see  at  once  the  force  and  beauty  of  the  illus- 
tration. Again,  it  is  recorded  that  when  (Matt.  v.  13) 
"salt  has  lost  its  savor  it  is  thenceforth  good  for  nothing, 
but  to  be  cast  out  and  trodden  under  the  foot  of  men." 
Now  we  know  that  the  muriate  of  soda,  which  is  the 
common  salt  used  in  this  country,  must  entirely  evapo- 
rate before  it  can  lose  its  saltness ;  so  obscurity  hangs 
over  this  passage  till  it  is  known  that  the  salt  of  Judea, 
used  in  the  time  of  the  Saviour,  was  dug  from  the  earth, 
and  found  mixed  with  a  white  earthy  substance,  which, 
when  the  salt  had  evaporated  by  exposure  to  the  weather, 
was  good  for  nothing  but  to  be  scattered  along  walks 
and  such  like  places.  Now,  the  darkness  is  dissipated, 
and  the  beauty  of  the  illustration  appreciated. 

Various  other  passages  might  be  adduced,  and  some 
of  a  much  stronger  character,  but  these  are  selected 
because  simple  and  plain,  and  sufficiently  illustrate  the 
principle,  that  some  knowledge  of  the  age  and  its  usages 
in  which  the  Apostles  wrote,  is  indispensably  necessary 
to  a  clear  understanding  of  the  Holy  Scriptures. 

Let  us  now  take  a  case  that  shows  the  application 
of  this  principle  to  the  passage  under  consideration. 
Suppose  some  one  of  the  Christian  denominations  in 
our  land  were  about  to  send  eleven  missionaries  to  one 
of  the  Pacific  Isles,  and  the  proper  authority  should 
say  to  them  in  nearly  the  words  of  the  Saviour :    "Go 


184  INl'LUENCE  OF  PREVIOUS  USAGE. 

ye,  therefore,  and  disciple  all  the  people,  baptizing  them 
in  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the 
Holy  Ghost."  "W^ould  they  not  construe  these  words 
according  to  the  former  practice  of  the  Church  to  which 
they  belonged,  and  act  in  regard  to  the  young  children 
as  they  and  their  people  with  whom  they  were  associa- 
ted had  always  acted  ?  Most  assuredly.  If  sent  out 
by  the  Methodists,  or  Presbyterians,  or  Episcopalians, 
or  Lutherans,  or  any  other  denomination  among  whom 
young  children  are  baptized,  they  would  understand 
their  commission  to  include  young  children  with  their 
parents,  and  would  baptize  them.  Wherefore  ?  Be- 
cause they  had  always  been  accustomed  to  receive  young 
children  into  the  Church,  and  knew  that  those  wdio  sent 
them  did  the  same,  and  therefore  it  was  not  necessary 
to  specify  more  minutely  in  the  charge  given  them. 
But  suppose  this  same  number  of  men  had  been  sent 
out  by  the  Baptist  denomination,  how  would  they  under- 
stand the  charge?  Why,  that  children  are  not  included. 
And  for  the  same  reasons  given  in  the  case  of  the  others, 
they  were  not  accustomed  to  the  baptism  of  little  chil- 
dren, and  knew  that  those  who  sent  them  were  opposed 
to  it ;  and  therefore  there  was  no  necessity  for  them  to 
be  more  specific  in  regard  to  young  children.  Both 
equally  sincere — both  acting  in  accordance  with  the 
intention  of  the  charge  given  them,  and  yet  acting  in 
direct  opposition  on  this  point. 

In  both  cases  there  was  no  necessity  for  being  more 
explicit,  and  yet  so  much  is  taken  for  granted,  that  a 
third  party  in  a  different  country  would  not  be  able  to 
understand    such  a  commission,  until    they  had    made 


ONE  INTERPRETATION  OF  COMMISSIONS.  185 

themselves  acquainted  with  the  rites  and  practices  of 
those  by  whom  the  commission  was  given.  Here,  then, 
we  see  the  absolute  necessity  of  going  back  to  the  days 
of  the  Apostles,  and  endeavoring  to  make  ourselves 
acquainted  with  the  usages  of  the  Jews,  and  the  peculiar 
circumstances  under  which  this  commission  was  issued. 
TVe  have  seen  how  those  who  immediately  succeeded  the 
Apostles  understood  it ;  let  us,  then,  in  the  next  place, 
examine  the  rites  and  usages  to  which  the  Apostles  had 
been  accustomed,  and  the  circumstances  under  which 
they  received  it,  and  see  if  we  can  learn  how  they  acted 
under  it. 

Now  these  very  men  unto  whom  this  "commission" 
w^as  granted,  had  been  themselves  made  members  of  the 
Jewish  Church  in  their  infancy.  They  had  been  accus- 
tomed all  their  lives  to  regard  young  and  old  of  the 
same  family  as  members  together  of  the  same  Church — 
all  alike  included  in  the  same  covenant — entitled  to  the 
same  religious  privileges,  heirs  together  of  the  same 
Divine  promises.  With  such  training  and  ideas  of 
Church  organization,  how  would  they  probably  inter- 
pret a  commission  that  made  no  exception  to  youno- 
children  ?  As  Infants  had  always  been  received  into 
the  Church  up  to  that  time,  is  it  at  all  probable  that  they 
would  now  exclude  them  without  specific  instructions  so 
to  do  ? 

No  one  doubts  whether  it  was  the  custom  of  the  Jews 
to  confer  the  initiatory  rite  of  their  religion  on  their 
children  in  early  infancy,  and  that  their  children  were 
regarded  as  capable  of  covenanted  privileges,  and  re- 
cognised throughout  the  Old  Testament  Dispensation  as 

16* 


186  COMPREHENSIVENESS  OF  COMMISSION. 

members  of  the  Church  with  their  parents.  And  when 
to  men,  who  had  been  thus  associated  all  their  lives,  is 
given  a  "  commission"  broad  enough  to  include  little  chil- 
dren— aye,  expressed  in  the  very  terms  commonly  applied 
to  Jewish  members  (^aer^tai,  /xaOr^tsvaati)  "  disciple  and 
make  disciples"  (St.  John.  ix.  28.)*  how  must  they  have 
construed  it  in  regard  to  infant  children,  no  exception 
being  made  to  them  ?  When  commanded  to  disciple  all 
nations,  would  they  not  suppose  all  were  included,  little 
ones  as  ^Yell  as  their  parents  ? 

Suppose  circumcision  to  be  put  in  the  place  of  baptism, 
and  their  commission  had  run  thus,  "  Go  ye  and  disci- 
ple all  nations,  circumcising  them  in  the  name  of  the 
Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  lto\j  Ghost ;"  doubt 
ye  that  they  would  have  hesitated  a  moment  about  cir- 
cumcising the  children  of  their  converts  ?  You  cannot, 
since  you  know  that  this  was  continued  for  a  long  time, 
to<Tether  with  baptism. f  And  if  children  were-  no  longer 
considered  capable  of  covenanted  blessings  why,  we  ask 
ao-ain,  was  it  not  made  known,  instead  of  permitting 
them  to  be  circumcised  by  members  of  the  Christian 
Church  ?  If  the  Messiah  intended  to  curtail  the  reli- 
gious privileges  which  little  children  had  enjoyed  with 
their  fathers  ever  since  God  had  established  a  visible 
Church  for  his  people,  is  it  not  reasonable  to  suppose 
some  specification  would  be  made  in  this  commission,  or 
in  his  teaching  otherwise  ?  But  instead  of  any  intima- 
tion of  that  kind,  he  had  on  the  contrary  declared  that 
"of  such  is  the  kingdom  of  God  ;"  had  commanded  lit- 

"   Sec  ako  Talmud  and  Justin  Martyr,  Apol.  2,  page  62. 
f  Acts.  XV.  xxi. 


BAPTISM  OF  JEWISH  PROSELYTES.  187 

tie  children  to  be  brought  to  him  to  receive  his  blessing, 
and  had  shown  by  word  and  gesture  they  w^ere  not  to  be 
treated  as  ''  aliens"  in  his  Church. 

Further,  these  men  had  been  already  ordained  preach- 
ers to  the  "lost  sheep  of  the  house  of  Israel ;"  (Mark 
iii.  13,  14.  Math.  x.  5,  7,)  had  preached  to,  and  wor- 
shipped w^ith  Jews,  recognizing  them  and  their  little 
children  as  fellow-members  of  the  same  Church  ;  and 
called  upon  them  to  prepare  for  the  reign  of  their  Mes- 
siah. But  now  the  "  middle  wall  of  partition  is  broken 
down" — Christ  has  tasted  death  for  every  man,  and 
risen  from  the  dead ;  all  power  is  given  unto  him,  and 
he  commissions  them  to  "go  into  all  the  world,  and 
preach  the  Gospel  to  every  creature" — their  commission 
is  enlarged,  not  diminished — Gentiles  are  included  with 
Israel.  Restrictions  are  removed  instead  of  being  im- 
posed— parents  and  children  of  other  nations  are  to  be 
baptized  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  Son  and  Holy  Ghost. 

Again,  at  the  time  our  Saviour  delivered  this  commis- 
sion it  was,  and  had  been  for  many  centuries,  as  we 
shall  show,  the  custom  of  the  Jews  to  baptize  all  their 
proselytes  from  other  nations,  both  parents  and  chil- 
dren.* Their  rule  was  first  to  circumcise,  then  baptize, 
and  then  offer  for  them  a  sacrifice.  Circumcision  brought 
them  under  the  Abrahamic  Covenant,  baptism  brought 
them  under  the  Mosaic.  The  offering  of  the  sacrifice 
was  in  obedience  to  the  ritual  law.  And  they  referred 
to  Numbers  xv.  15,  for  thus  acting  with  proselytes, 
w^hich  reads :  "  One  ordinance  shall  be  for  both  you  of 
the  congregation,  and  also  for  the  stranger  that  sojourn- 

*  See  Lightfoot  and  Wootten. 


188  CIRCUMCISION,  BAPTISM  AND  SACHIFICE. 

eth  with  you,  an  ordinance  forever  in  your  generations : 
as  ye  are,  so  shall  the  stranger  be  before  the  Lord." 
By  stranger,  was  included  all  of  other  nations,  whether 
they  be  young  children  found  in  an  exposed  state  and 
taken  home,  or  parents  with  their  children  who  joined 
their  religion,  or  even  those  who  became  servants  to 
them. 

Maimonides,  the  great  interpreter  of  the  Jewish  law, 
says : 

"And  so  in  all  ages,  when  an  Ethnic  is  willing  to  enter  into 
covenant  and  gather  himself  under  the  wings  of  the  Majesty  of 
God,  and  take  upon  him  the  yoke  of  the  law ;  he  must  be  circum- 
cised and  baptized,  and  bring  a  sacrifice.  As  it  is  written,  '  As 
you  are,  so  shall  the  stranger  be.'  How  are  you  ?  By  circum- 
cision, and  baptism,  and  bringing  of  a  sacrifice.  So  likewise  the 
stranger  (or  proselyte)  through  all  generations  ;  by  circumcision, 
and  baptism,  and  bringing  of  a  sacrifice.'' — Isuri.  Biah.,  c.  13. 

Baptism  was  administered  to  all  the  children  who  were 
born  before  the  parents'  baptism,  but  not  to  those  born 
after  it,  because  these  were  by  birth  inheritors  of  the 
ceremonial  privileges  obtained  by  it.  This  was  in  con- 
formity also  to  the  above  rule.  For  their  forefathers 
were  all  of  them  Jews,  baptized  unto  Moses  in  the  cloud 
and  the  sea — men,  women,  and  children  ;  but  those  born 
afterwards  were  by  birth  inheritors  of  the  privileges  of 
baptism,  and  only  circumcision  and  sacrifice  were  neces- 
sary for  them.  "  The  sons  of  proselytes,  (says  Light- 
foot)  in  the  following  generations  were  circumcised,  but 
not  baptized,  as  being  already  Israelites."  Maimonides, 
in  the  same  chapter  just  cited,  says,  "  A  proselyte  under 
age,  they  are  wont  to  baptize  on  the  knowledge  of  the 


EARLY  DATE  OF  MISHNA.  189 

house  of  judgment,  [the  court,]  because  this  is  for  his 
good."  That  is,  when  orphans  were  baptized  the  court 
or  consistory  acted  as  parents  for  them. 

Concerning  the  age  of  the  child  to  be  baptized  they 
had  this  rule.  "  Any  male  child,  a  proselyte,  that  is 
under  the  age  of  thirteen  years  and  a  day,  and  females 
that  are  under  twelve  years  and  a  day,  must  be  baptized 
as  infants,  at  the  request  and  by  the  assent  of  the  father, 
or  the  authority  of  the  Court,  because  such  an  one  is 
not  yet  the  son  of  assent."  That  is,  not  old  enough  to 
be  baptized  on  his  own  responsibility. 

The  Jerusalem  Mishna  says  that  if  a  girl,  born  of 
heathen  parents,  be  made  a  proselyte  after  she  be  three 
years  and  a  day  old,  she  is  not  to  have  such  and  such 
privileges.  And  the  Babylonian  edition  reads,  if  she 
be  made  a  proselyte  before  that  age,  she  shall  enjoy  such 
privileges.*  From  w^hich  it  must  be  obvious  to  every 
reader,  as  Selden  and  Wotton  both  remark,  "that  chil- 

*  This  shows  that  the  objection  raised  against  Maimonides  as  not 
ancient  enough,  is  of  no  force,  since  the  Mishna  (the  text)  of  both 
the  Jerusalem  and  Babylonish  Talmuds,  contains  regulations  for  chil- 
dren made  proselytes  under  and  beyond  three  j-ears  of  age.  The  Mishna 
Avas  compiled  at  so  "early  a  date,  that  no  one  will  accuse  the  Jews 
of  borrowing  this  practice  from  Christians,  or  if  they  do,  they  admit 
all  we  ask,  which  is,  that  the  Apostles  practiced  it.  According  to 
Dr.  Prideaux,  the  Jerusalem  Mishna  was  compiled  in  the  Apostolic 
age,  just  after  the  destruction  of  the  Temple,  and  by  the  almost  unan- 
imous consent  of  critics,  admitted  to  be  completed  in  the  second 
century.*  And  if  Jehuda  the  Holy,  who  was  engaged  forty  years  in 
digesting  these  laws,  did  not  collect  this  concerning  ''young  jDrose- 
lytes"  from  among  the  old  customs  of  his  nation  in  use  before  the 
coming  of  Christ,  then  it  was  borrowed  from  or  suggested  by  the 
practice  of  Christians  at  a  period  so  early  that  it  is  as  fatal  to  the  cause 
of  Antipedobaptism  as  it  was  contrary  to  the  feelings  and  prejudices 
of  the  Jewish  nation  at  the  time,  or  as  would  be  the  admission  of  its 
previous  existence. 

*  See  Horue  and  his  Authorities. 


190  BAPTISM  BEFORE  JOHN  BAPTIST. 

dren,  however  young,  vfere  made  proselytes.     The  latter 
citing  also  largely  from  the  words  of  the  original  law.* 

Thus  we  see  that  Infant  baptism  itself  was  practiced 
from  time  to  time  before  John  the  Baptist  came  preach- 
ing the  baptism  of  repentance.  Hence  it  w^as,  the 
people  manifested  no  surprise  at  baptism  itself,  but  that 
John  should  baptize,  as  sanctifying  the  people  for  some 
great  personage,  and  new  dispensation,  when  he  ac- 
knowledged himself  not  to  be  the  Christ  nor  EHas,  nor 
that  Prophet  which  was  to  come.  "  Why  baptizest  thou 
then  if  thou  be  none  of  these  ?"  Why  this  extra  ablu- 
tion and  preparation  of  Jews,  if  not  for  their  promised 
Messiah,  and  this  dispensation,  or  some  prophet  that  is 
to  come  ?  Which  corroborates  the  Talmud,  that  bap- 
tism, or  purification  by  water,  was  a  thing  in  use  and 
well  known  before  the  coming  of  John. 

Now  what  can  be  more  obvious  than  that  men,  who 
were  Jews,  acquainted  w^ith  the  usages  of  their  nation, 
who  possessed  the  feelings  of  Jews — who  had  always 
been  accustomed  to  have  their  children  in  the  Church 
with  them,  and  familiar  with  the  practice  of  both  cir- 
cumcising and  baptizing  children,  would  construe  this 
commission  precisely  as  the  missionaries  would  who 
were  accustomed  to  the  baptism  of  children,  unless  ex- 
pressly instructed  to  the  contrary  ?  How  could  they 
restrict  it  to  certain  ages,  when  they  had  never  known 
any  age  excepted  before  ?  and  when  their  commission 
was  as  broad  as  language  could  make  it — "  Go  ye,  there- 
fore, and  disciple  or  proselyte  all  nations." 

"  The  Anabaptists  object,"   says  Lightfoot,  "  that  it 
■^  8ce  Wall,  Lig'htfoot,  ami  others. 


LITTLE  CHILDREN  PURIFIED.  191 

is  not  commanded  to  baptize  infants,  therefore  thej  are 
not  to  be  baptized.  To  whom  I  answer :  It  is  not  for- 
bidden to  baptize  infants,  therefore  they  are  to  be 
baptized.  And  the  reason  is  plain.  For  when  Pedo- 
baptism,  in  the  Jewish  Church,  was  so  known,  usual  and 
frequent  in  the  admission  of  proselytes,  that  scarcely 
anything  was  more  known,  usual,  and  frequent.  There 
was  no  need  to  strengthen  it  with  any  precept  when 
baptism  was  now  passed  into  an  evangelical  sacrament. 
For  Christ  took  baptism  into  his  hands,  and  into  an 
evangelical  use  as  he  found  it — this  only  added,  that 
he  might  promote  it  to  a  worthier  end  and  a  more  ex- 
tensive use. 

"  The  whole  nation  knew  well  enough  that  little  chil- 
dren used  to  be  baptized.  There  was  no  need  of  a 
precept  for  that  which  had  ever  by  common  use  pre- 
vailed  

"  On  the  other  hand,  there  was  need*  of  a  plain  and 
open  prohibition,  that  infants  and  little  children  should 
not  be  baptized,  if  our  Saviour  would  not  have  had 
them  baptized.  For  since  it  was  most  common  in  all 
foregoing  ages  that  little  children  should  be  baptized,  if 
Christ  had  wished  to  have  that  custom  abolished,  he 
would  openly  have  forbidden  it.  Therefore,  his  silence, 
and  the  silence  of  Scripture  in  this  matter,  confirms 
Infant  baptism,  and  continueth  it  unto  all  ages." 

When  the  Saviour  came,  all  male  proselytes  were  ad- 
mitted into  the  Jewish  Church  by  circumcision,  baptism, 
and  sacrifice — the  female  by  baptism  and  sacrifice.  He 
abolished,  in  his  death,  circumcision  and  sacrifice,  and 
only  baptism  was  left  as  a  sign  of  the  covenant,  or  pro- 
fession of  religion,  and  this  he  directed  to  be  given  to 


192  APPLICATION  OF  PRINCIPLES. 

all,  in  the  name  of  the  Trinity,  as  indicative  of  the  new 
dispensation.*  Or  if  any  one  prefers  it,  for  the  sake  of 
illustration  say  he  abolished  all  former  ordinances,  and 
selected  baptism ;  because  common  to  both  sexes,  less 
burdensome,  and  more  expressive  of  the  new  dispensa- 
tion ;  and  hence  made  it  the  initiatory  rite  of  the 
Church  under  this  dispensation.  In  either  case,  how 
would  men  accustomed  to  see  this  rite  applied  to  chil- 
dren, understand  the  commission  "to  disciple,"  and 
apply  it  to  "all  nations?"  Would  they  not  suppose 
that  young  children  were  included  also  ?  If  the  boy 
sent  to  the  post  office,  must  infer  letters  and  pamphlets 
were  included  with  the  "newspapers,"  and  the  mission- 
aries of  the  Lutheran  and  other  Pedobaptist  Churches, 
that  young  children  were  included  in  this  commission, 
so  must  the  Apostles  have  understood  children  included 
in  theirs.  We  ask  the  opposers  of  Infant  baptism  to 
pause  and  consider  this  case,  and  candidly  to  say  if 
under  these  circumstances  this  commission  can  be  rightly 
construed  in  any  other  way  ?  We  may  even  lay  aside 
all  the  influence  the  rite  itself  would  exert,  and  adopt 
any   other    ceremony  of  admitting   members    into    the 

"•  Some  have  concluded  from  Jewish  haptism  that  it  is  unnecessary 
to  contmue  baptism  among  a  people  whose  forefathers  have  all  been 
baptized.  But  they  should  remember  that  God's  people  have  always 
had  some  badge  or  mark  of  profession — that  although  among  the 
Jews,  and  the  proselytes  to  their  religion,  baptism  was  not  given  to 
succeeding  generations,  yet  circumcision  was,  and  also  sacrihce.  But 
these  are  abolished  under  the  Christian  dispensation,  and  baptism 
only  remains,  which  must  be  given  to  every  one,  as  a  mark  or  seal 
of  the  new  covenant,  as  circumcision  was  under  the  former  dispensa- 
tion. This  is  plaiaiiy  taught  in  Colossians  ii.  11,  12.  But  as  the 
opjjosers  of  Infant  baptism,  as  w^ell  as  its  advocates,  admit  baptism  is 
to  be  given  to  every  one,  there  is  no  need  for  discussing  that  question 
in  this  jilaco. 


LITTLE  CHILDREN.  INCLUDED.  193 

Christian  Church,  and  the  construction  would  be  the 
same.  For  these  men  were  all  Jews,  educated  Jews, 
possessing  the  feelings  of  Jews,  loved  their  children, 
and  had  always  seen  such  received  into  the  Church,  and 
wlmtever  religious  rite  had  been  instituted  as  the  door 
into  the  visible  Church,  they  would  have  admitted  the 
children  with  their  proselyted  parents — unless  instructed 
expressly  to  the  contrary — and  have  justified  themselves 
for  it  on  principles  of  duty  and  reason,  as  well  as  of 
education  and  usage.  For  God  was  the  same  God  he 
ever  had  been.  He  had  not  changed,  and  could  not 
change.  The  great  principles  of  his  religion  and  the 
foundation  of  his  Church  were  the  same  now  as  in  the 
days  of  Abraham.  The  relation  between  parent  and 
child  were  still  the  same.  He  was  about  to  change  his 
dispensation  in  the  government  of  the  people,  but  not 
the  essentials  of  his  Church.  Rituals  and  ordinances 
were  to  be  changed,  means  of  grace  and  helps  to  faith 
instituted  better  adapted  to  the  state  of  the  world,  while 
the  foundation  of  ricrhteousness  and  essence  of  the  Church 
must  ever  remain  the  same,  because  founded  on  the  im- 
mutable principles  of  the  nature  of  the  great  Jehovah 
himself.  These  being  the  same  before  these  rituals  were 
first  ordained,  and  while  they  were  in  force,  and  after 
their  abolition  ;  were,  and  are,  and  ever  must  be  still  the 
same.  And  if  children  were  fit  to  be  members  at  one 
time,  why  not  fit  at  any  other  time  ?  If  God  commanded 
that  they  should  be  received  with  their  fathers,  and 
the  seal  or  mark  of  his  covenant  to  be  given  them 
from  the  first  moment  he  began  to  mark  out  for  him- 
self a  select  visible  people,  and  has  never  since,  by 
IT 


194  STATE  OF  THINGS  AFTERWARDS. 

word  or  deed,  forbidden  them  this  privilege ;  who  will 
dare  to  prohibit  them  as  soon  as  that  badge  is  changed 
for  another  ?  But  again :  as  Knapp,  in  his  Theology, 
justly  remarks,*  "not  only  do  circumstances  at  the 
time,  and  usages  before  a  command  is  given,  enable 
others  at  a  later  period  the  more  clearly  to  understand 
it,  but  the  state  of  things  that  follow  afterwards  often 
throw  much  light  on  it."  Suppose,  for  instance,  in 
the  case  of  the  missionaries  referred  to,  some  fifty 
or  a  hundred  years  after  their  death,  we  were  to  visit 
those  isles,  and  find  their  successors  practicing  Infant 
baptism  in  every  place,  and  were  to  ask  them  by 
what  authority  they  did  this,  and  they  were  to  inform 
ns  that  the  "  first  missionaries,  their  apostles,  prac- 
ticed and  ordered  it,"  should  we  not  infer  that  one 
of  the  Churches  that  practiced  Infant  baptism  sent 
those  missionaries  ?  And  should  Ave  not  give  credit  to 
their  answers,  when  we  found  that  they  were  conscientious, 
pious  men  ?  aye,  intelligent  as  well  as  pious,  and  living 
among  many  who  had  known  and  conversed  with  inti- 
mate acquaintances  and  friends  of  their  missionaries  ? 

Now  this  is  precisely  the  state  of  the  question  before 
us.  The  Churches  of  Greece,  Rome,  Alexandria,  Cap- 
padocia,  Syria,  Arabia,  and  Palestine,  spread  over  thou- 
sands of  miles,  separated,  some  of  them,  so  far  from 
others  that  there  had  been  probably  little  or  no  commu- 
nication between  them,  are  all  found  in  the  practice  of 
Infant  baptism  in  the  next  century  after  the  Apostles ; 
and  no  one  ever  calling  in  question  its  lawfulness.  On 
the  contrary,  the  most  learned  man  born  in  that  period 
records,  that  it  was  enjoined  by  the  Apostles. 

*  Vol.  ii.  p.  50. 


OBJECTIONS  CONSIDERED.  195 

Considering  the  whole  evidence  in  the  case,  the  cus- 
tom of  the  Jews  at  the  time  this  commission  was  given 
— the  language  itself,  and  the  state  of  things  found  in 
the  Churches  soon  afterwards,  the  fact  is  as  fully  estah- 
lished,  according  to  fixed  laws  of  interpretation  that  the 
commission  given  to  the  Apostles  for  organizing  the 
Christian  Church,  embraces  Infant  baptism,  as  that 
water  should  be  used  in  the  administration  of  the  ordi- 
nance. 

1.  Let  us  now  consider  some  of  the  objections  that 
have  been  urged  against  this  interpretation.  First,  it  is 
said  the  Apostles  w^ere  commanded  to  "  teach"  and  then 
baptize  :  therefore,  the  persons  to  be  baptized,  were  only 
such  as  could  first  be  taught.  In  reply  to  which,  we  re- 
mark, this  is  a  mistake.  The  terms  of- the  commission 
do  not  necessarily  imply  instruction  to  all.  The  word 
in  the  first  part  of  it  (^^laeritivoats,)  translated  in  our  ver- 
sion "teach,"  is  an  entirely  diiferent  word  from  that  in 
in  the  latter  part  (8i8a^xovteg,)  translated  teaching.  The 
former  means  to  "  disciple"  or  proselyte — while  the  lat- 
ter means  imparting  instruction.  The  better  rendering 
of  the  whole  passage  (as  every  reader  of  the  original  well 
knows)  is,  "  Go  ye,  therefore,  and  disciple — make 
learners  of — all  nations,  baptizing  them  in  the  name  of 
the*Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost: 
teaching  them  to  observe  all  things  whatsoever  I  have 
commanded  you" — which  means,  '^  Go  and  bring  into 
my  kingdom  every  nation,  initiating  them  by  baptism, 
and  teaching  or  training  them  up  in  all  the  doctrines 
and  precepts  which  I  have  commanded  you."  Now,  as 
kingdoms  of  the  world  are  confined  to  no  age  or  sex,  so 


196  MEANING  OF  DISCIPLE. 

the  visible  kingdom  of  Christ  on  earth,  which  he  chose 
to  represent  under  the  same  name,  is  confined  to  none, 
but  designed  to  embrace  all  ages  and  nations.  To  con- 
vert nations  to  any  faith,  we  must  of  course  in  the 
beginning  work  chiefly  among  the  responsible  portion  of 
the  nation,  we  must  first  convert  the  parents  before  we 
can  expect  to  bring  their  children  under  the  influences 
of  our  principles.  So  in  the  kingdom  of  Christ,  his 
ambassadors  were  sent  forth  to  address  and  convince  the 
parents — the  responsible  portions  of  the  community,  who 
must  be  converted  before  they  could  reach  their  children. 
But  when  these  were  converted  they  would  bring  their 
children  with  them  of  their  own  accord.  Or  as  St.  Peter 
did  on  the  day  of  Pentecost,  when  multitudes  were  made 
to  cry  out — "men  and  brethren,  what  shall  we  do?" 
tell  them  the  "  promise  is  to  you  and  to  your  children." 
(Acts.  ii.  37.  39.)  And  as  in  the  case  of  the  jailer 
and  others,  whose  children  were  present  when  the 
parent  believed,  baptize  them  all.  Instead  of  the  term 
fxaeritivBvv — to  "  disciplc  or  proselyte,"  militating  against 
young  children,  it  is  of  itself,  when  rightly  construed, 
proof  positive  that  they  are  included.  For  it  is  as  ap- 
plicable to  children  as  to  adults,  and  we  have  not  the 
slightest  intimation  that  it  is  used  here  in  a  limited  sense. 
On  the  contrar}^,  it  seems  to  be  given  in  its  widest  |)os- 
sible  application — "  disciple  all  nations" — hence  all  that 
compose  nations  of  every  age  and  sex.  MadritsvGatt  is 
from  fj-adyitrj^ —  a  "disciple"  which  is  from  fiavOavio  to 
"learn."  Therefore  "a  disciple"  is  a  learner  and  to 
"  make  disciples"  is  to  make  learners.  The  Church,  in 
all  ages,  has  been  a  school   for  teaching  the  things  of 


CHURCH  A  SCHOOL.  107 

God  and  training  its  members  in  the  way  of  Holiness. 
Of  the  father  of  circumcision,  God  said,  ''  Seeing  that 

Abraham ^ill   command  his  children  and  his 

household  after  him,  and  they  shall  keep  the  way  of  the 
Lord,  to  do  justice  and  judgment,  that  the  Lord  mVy 
bring  upon  Abraham  that  which  he  hath  spoken  of  him." 
(Gen.  xviii.  18,  19.)  Moses  was  instructed  to  teach 
Israel,  "  And  these  words  which  I  command  thee  this 
day,  shall  be  in  thy  heart.  And  thou  shalt  teach  them 
diligently  to  thy  children,  and  shalt  talk  of  them  when 
thou  sittest  in  thy  house,  and  when  thou  walkest  by  the 
way,  and  when  thou  liest  down,  and  when  thou  risest  up. 
And  thou  shalt  bind  them  for  a  sign  upon  thy  hand,  and 
they  shall  be  as  frontlets  between  thine  eyes.  And  thou 
shalt  write  them  upon  the  posts  of  thy  house,  and  on  thy 
gates."  (Deut.  vi.  6.,  9.)  Such  was  the  character  of 
the  Church  for  teaching  and  training  its  members  from 
earliest  childhood  under  the  Okl  Testament  Dispensa- 
tion. Under  the  New,  precisely  the  same  is  to  be  re- 
tained. ''  Go  ye,  therefore,  and  teach  (make  disciples 
—scholars  of)  all  nations,  baptizing  them  in  the  name 
of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost ; 
teaching  them  to  observe  all  things  whatsoever  I  have 
commanded  you ;  and  lo,  I  am  with  you  always  even 
unto  the  end  of  the  world,"  (Math,  xviii.  19,  20.)  was 
the  commission  of  the  Saviour  himself. 

Now  a  school  must  have  different  grades  of  learners, 
or  else  there  must  be  many  schools.  Christ  has  but  one 
school  for  all— and  this  school  wonderfully  adapted  to 
every  age.  It  has  instructions  for  the  first  impression 
the  youngest  mind  can  receive.     And  the  first  impres- 

17* 


198  APPLICATION  TO    LITTLE  CHILDREN. 

sion  made  oil  the  infant  mind  ought  to  be  of  Christ's 
teaching.  ''As  the  twig  is  bent,  the  tree's  inclined." 
And  as  a  learner,  whose  name  is  simply  enrolled,  is  call- 
ed a  pupil  or  scholar  before  he  commences  to  learn,  so 
inHhe  case  of  a  disciple :  whoever  is  set  apart,  and  ini- 
tiated into  the  school  of  Christ,  is  called  a  disciple  from 
his  baptism.  Just  as  all  the  males  of  the  Kohathites, 
from  a  month  old  and  upwards,  are  called  "keepers  of 
the  charge  of  the  sanctuary" — infants  as  well  as 
adults,  because  belonging  to  the  body  and  designed 
for  that  office.  Or  as  the  little  ones  recorded  in  the 
book  of  Deuteronomy  xxix.  11,  12,  are  said  to  "  enter 
into  covenant  with  the  Lord,"  although  too  young  to 
know  what  the  term  covenant  meant.  "  Little  prose- 
lytes," a  phrase  of  the  import  with  disciples,  was  in 
familiar  use  among  the  Jews  in  the  days  of  our  Saviour. 
Children,  however  young,  whether  received  with  their 
proselyted  parents,  or  brought  under  the  Jewish  faith 
in  any  other  way,  were  called  "young  proselytes."  The 
Mishna  of  the  Jewish  Talmud,  both  of  Babylon  and 
Jerusalem,  speak  of  such  proselytes,  and  as  already 
quoted,  defines  the  privileges  which  may  be  enjoyed  by 
those  born  of  heathen  parents,  and  made  "proselytes" 
after  three  years  and  a  day  old,  and  of  such  as  shall  be 
made  proselytes  before  that  age. 

Justin  Martyr,  as  has  been  before  remarked,  applies 
the  very  same  word  which  is  used  in  this  commission  to 
children  in  general,  saying  that  he  knew  many  of  both 
sexes  made  disciples  (y]i.(.a9rjtBv9rjGav)  to  Christ  from  child- 
hood. 

2.  It  is  also  objected  that  this  commission,  as  record- 


FAITH  AS  AN  OBJECTION  ANSWERED.  199 

cd  by  another  Evangelist,  requires  faith  before  baptism. 
Mark  xvi.  15,  16.  *'  Go  ye  into  all  the  world  and  preach 
the  Gospel  to  every  creature — he  that  believeth  and  is 
baptized  shall  be  saved,  but  he  that  believeth  not  shall 
be  damned."  The  commission  is  here  embraced  in  the 
first  verse,  ''  Go  ye  into  all  the  world  and  preach  the 
Gospel  to  every  creature."  The  next  merely  affirms 
what  will  be  the  consequence  of  receiving  or  rejecting 
their  mission — ''  He  that  believeth  and  is  baptized  shall 
be  saved,  but  he  that  believeth  not  shall  be  damned." 
Now  if  this  passage  is  to  be  arrayed  against  children  to 
keep  them  from  baptism,  it  must  also  keep  them  from 
salvation,  for  it  expressly  says,  ''he  that  believeth  not 
shall  be  damned."  But  who  will  apply  it  to  children, 
and  dare  affirm  that  all  wdio  cannot  believe  shall  be 
damned  ?  No  one.  By  what  authority  then  can  we 
apply  one  clause  of  a  sentence  to  children  to  keep  them 
from  baptism,  and  then  exclude  them  from  the  next  part 
of  the  sentence,  when  there  is  evidently  no  change  of 
subject  matter  in  the  mind  of  the  author.*  The  true 
state  of  the  case  is,  the  Evangelist  simply  records  the 
broad  and  universal  character  of  the  commission,  and 
then  states  what  will  be  the  result  to  those  who  receive 
or  reject  the  offer  of  salvation  under  it.  Those  who  will 
hear  shall  live,  but  those  who  will  not  hear  shall  die. 

The  spread  of  the  Gospel,  of  course,  depended  on  the 
reception  it  met  with  among  the  acting,  thinking  portion 
of  the  community.     If  this  class  of  persons  received  it, 

*  The  reason  given  by  the  first  sect  who  rejected  Infant  baptism, 
as  we  have  SQen,  was  because  they  coukl  not  believe,  therefore,  could 
not  be  saved.  But  that  was  in  the  dark  ages,  and  their  followers  have 
since  changed  their  .ijround. 


200  REPENTANCE  PROM  ACTUAL  SINNERS. 

its  blessings  would  by  their  consent  be  given  to  minors 
and  children.  But  if  they  rejected  it,  much  that  might 
be  conveyed  to  others  would  be  lost  to  such  as  were  in 
part  dependent  on  them.  To  this  class  of  persons  alone 
then,  so  far  as  faith  is  concerned,  do  those  words  of  St. 
Mark  evidently  refer. 

Repentance^  as  well  as  faith^  are  generally  made  pre- 
requisites for  baptism,  but  not  in  the  case  of  infants. 
It  is  said,  (Acts  xi.  88,)  "  Repent  and  be  baptized  every 
one  of  you,  in  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ,  for  the  remis- 
sion of  sins."  Again,  Philip  said  unto  the  Eunuch, 
(Acts  viii.  3,)  ^'  If  thou  believest  with  all  thy  heart, 
thou  mayst"  [be  baptized.]  But  these  are  replies 
made  to  those  who  had  proposed  particular  questions. 
The  very  same  would  in  this  day  be  said  by  any  ortho- 
dox missionary  under  similar  circumstances,  whether 
an  advocate  for  the  baptism  of  children  or  not.  For 
every  sound  divine  requires  repentance  and  faith  on 
the  part  of  adults.  But  it  does  not  follow  that  the 
same  must  be  required  of  little  children.  The  covenant 
made  with  Abraham  was  nevertheless  based  on  faith; 
children  were  embraced  in  it  who  could  not  believe. 
"Abraham  believed  God,  and  it  was  counted  unto  him 
for  righteousness."  .  .  .  "And  he  received  the  sign  of 
circumcision,  a  seal  of  the  righteousness  of  the  faith 
which  he  had,  yet  being  uncircumcised."'*''  But  to  Ish- 
mael,  thirteen  years  old,  and  to  Isaac,  eight  j^M  old, 
and  to  all  infant  male  descendants  afterwards,  as  we 
have  already  seen,  was  this  sign  and  seal  given,  which 
brought  them  under  the  same  covenant,  although  they 

*  Rom.  iv.  3,  11. 


FIRST  AND  SECOND  ADAM.  201 

were  incapable  of  faith.  Abraham  was  ''justified  by 
faith,"  and  commanded  to  "walk  before  the  Lord  and 
be  perfect."*  The  covenant  made  with  him  was  there- 
fore based  as  much  on  faith  in  God,  and  obedience  to 
his  commands,  as  is  the  covenant  now  under  Christ. 
Indeed,  the  Christian  covenant,  as  we  have  already  shown, 
is  the  continuation  of  the  Abrahamic  covenant  more 
fully  developed,  and  under  a  more  efficient  dispensation, 
into  which  children  were  received  from  the  first,  and 
continued  up  to  the  time  of  Christ — why  should  their 
incapacity  to  "believe  and  obey,"  exclude  them  after 
the  coming  of  Christ,  if  it  did  not  before  ? 

And  though  the  Christian  were  one  entire  new  cove- 
nant, it  would  be  no  more  a  covenant  of  faith  than  that 
of  Abraham.  And  if  the  inability  of  little  children  to 
exercise  faith  did  not  exclude  them  from  the  former, 
why  should  it  from  the  latter  ?  If  none  can  be  baptized 
but  those  who  can  believe  according  to  such  an  inter- 
pretation of  that  passage,  then  consistency  requires  it 
to  be  interpreted  that  none  can  be  saved  who  cannot 
believe ;  for  the  only  alternative  then  allowed,  is  dam- 
nation to  those  who  do  not  believe  !  Shall  we  accept 
such  a  construction,  or  rather  that  the  passage  does  not 
refer  to  little  children  except  through  their  parents  and 
representatives,  and  that  as  they  were  involved  in  the 
sin  of  the  first  Adam,  without  their  oAvn  personal  acts, 
so  they  can  be  made  participants  of  the  blessings  of  the 
covenant  of  the  second  Adam,  in  like  manner  ? 

3.    But  again,  it  is  argued  as  an  objection   to   Infant 
baptism,  that   Christ  was   not   baptized  till   adult  age. 
^  7  Gen.  xvii. 


202  INFANT  MEMBERSHIP   OF  CHRIST. 

This  is  to  plead  his  example,  and  we  ought  to  follow  his 
example  in  everything  moral  and  pious.  But  if  in  all 
outward  ordinances,  mark  the  consequence  :  Christ  was 
circumcised  when  eight  days  old,  brought  to  the  temple 
and  dedicated  at  forty  days — was  a  strict  observer  of 
the  ritual  law  of  the  Jews — and  attended  the  synagogue 
worship  until  his  death.  He  was  .baptized  with  John's 
baptism  soon  after  it  commenced,  to  "fulfill  all  righteous- 
ness," in  recognition  of  the  authority  of  his  mission. 
Now  if  we  are  to  follow  his  example  in  all  outward  acts, 
we  must  either  submit  to  all  these  just  as  he  did,  or  else 
so  far  as  they  are  types  of  ordinances  in  the  Gospel 
Church.  And  if  the  latter,  then  we  have  another  argu- 
ment in  behalf  of  Infant  baptism,  rather  than  against 
it ;  for  as  he  was  brought  into  covenant,  made  a  member 
of  the  Jewish  Church,  and  dedicated  to  God  in  infancy, 
so  ought  we.  And  as  he  submitted  to  the  ordinance  of 
baptism  at  the  earliest  opportunity,  so  ought  we. 
John's  baptism  was  not  instituted  in  the  time  of  his 
infancy,  but  he  submitted  to  it  the  first  opportunity 
after  it  was  instituted,  and  hence  has  given  no  room 
to  plead  delay  from  his  example.  John's  baptism  was 
not  the  Christian  baptism,  because  Christ  did  not 
manifest  himself  as  the  Son  of  God  until  after  his 
baptism,  neither  did  John  baptize  in  the  name  of  the 
"Holy  Ghost."  His  baptism  was  " unto  repentance," 
saying  to  the  people,  "they  should  believe  on  Him 
who  should  come  after  him."  Christ's  baptism  was  in 
the  name  of  the  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost.  And 
we  read  of  those  who  had  been  baptized  unto  John's 
baptism,  that    afterwards   received   Christian   baptism, 


LITTLE  CHILDREN  BLESSED — NOT  "ALIENS."       203 

(Acts  xix.)  acknowledging  that  they  had  "  not  so  much 
as  heard  whether  there  be  any  Holy  Ghost." 

So  far,  then,  as  Christ's  early  life  is  concerned,  his 
example  is  altogether  on  the  side  of  Church  membership 
of  infants ;  and  so  far  as  his  acts  and  words  are  con- 
cerned in  regard  to  "little  children,"  they  all  tend  to 
the  same  point.  We  no  where  read  that  He  himself  bap- 
tized any  infant  or  adult.  "  Jesus  himself  baptized  not, 
but  his  disciples."*  But  we  read  of  his  being  displeased 
at  those  who  attempted  to  prevent  children  from  being 
brought  to  him  to  receive  his  blessing — and  of  "  his 
putting  his  hands  dft  them  and  praying,"  or  "taking 
them  up  in  his  arms  and  blessing  them,"  exhorting  oth- 
ers to  become  like  unto  them,  and  saying  that  "  of  such  is 
the  kingdom  of  heaven."  Observing  all  the  different 
circumstances  which  have  been  noticed  by  the  Evangel- 
ists, w^e  have  it  as  follows  : 

Matt.  xix.  13 ;  Luke  xviii.  15 ;  Mark  x.  13,  16.— 
''And  they  hrought  young  cliildren,  infants^  to  liim, 
that  he  should  touch  them,  put  his  hands  07i  them,  and 
pray,  and  his  disciples  7'ehuked  those  that  brought  tliem. 
But  when  Jesus  saiv  it,  he  luas  much  displeased,  and 
called  them  unto  him  and  said,  Suffer  little  children  to 
come  unto  me  and  forbid  them  not,  for  of  such  is  the 
kingdom  of  God.  Verily  I  say  unto  you,  ivhosoever 
shall  not  receive  the  kingdom  of  Grod,  as  a  little  child, 
shall  not  enter  therein.  And  he  took  them  up  in  his 
arms,  put  his  hands  upon  them,  and  blessed  them."-\ 

Does  anything  here  indicate  that  Christ  intended  to 
exclude  young  children  from  his   kingdom  ?     Does  he 

■^  St,  John  iv.  2.  f  See  Hay's  Treatise  on  Baptism. 


204  PHRASE,   KINCxDOM   OF  GOD. 

not,  on  the  contrary,  say,  ''^ of  such  is  the  kingdom  of 
God  ?" — every  action  and  word  of  his  own  going  to  show 
that  he  recognized  little  children,  not  as  aliens,  but  as 
fit  subjects  for  his  kingdom.  He  was  ''much  displeased" 
at  those  who  would  keep  them  from  being  brought  to 
him  to  receive  his  blessing ;  rebuked  them  and  called 
for  the  children  to  be  brought,  giving  as  a  reason  why 
they  should  be  permitted  to  come,  that  ''of  such  was 
the  kingdom. of  God,"  and  adding  that  all  must  become 
as  little  children  to  enter  into  his  kingdom.  He  then 
took  up  the  little  children  in  his  arms,  put  his  hands 
upon  them  and  blessed  them.  And^not  only  did  he  ex- 
hort others  to  become  like  unto  them — not  only  did  he 
take  them  up  in  his  arms,  thus  manifesting  his  friend- 
ship towards  them,  but  he  performed  the  significant  act  of 
laying  his  hands  upon  them,  to  impa^rt  a  religious  bless- 
ing, thereby  recognizing  them  as  belonging  to  the 
kingdom  of  God,  and  not  as  "foreigners  and  stran- 
gers." 

It  has  been  objected  that  the  phrase,  "kingdom  of 
God,  or  of  Heaven,"  does  not  necessarily  refer  to  God's 
visible  kingdom  on  earth,  but  often  refers  to  his  kingdom 
in  glory.  Whichever  construction  you  give,  the  result  is 
the  same  so  far  as  little  children  are  concerned.  If  fit 
for  the  church  in  glory,  they  are  certainly  fit  for  it  on 
earth. 

"Kingdom  of  God"  is  used  in  both  of  these  senses  in 
the  New  Testament,  but  generally  refers  more  directly 
to  the  reign  of  Christ,  and  the  visible  portion  of  the 
Church  on  earth,  and  frequently  includes  both  its  pre- 
paratory state  here  and  its  perfect  state  hereafter.  "  Re- 


2or> 

pent  je,  for  the  kingdom  of  heaven  is  at  hand,"'='  re- 
fers more  directly  to  the  reign  of  Christ  and  the  ushering 
in  of  the  New  Dispensation.  "  The  kingdom  of  heaven 
is  like  unto  a  net,  that  was  cast  into  the  sea,  and  gath- 
ered of  every  kind,"f — evidently  refers  to  the  visible 
Church  on  earth.  "  Xow  this  I  say,  brethren,  tliat  licsh 
and  blood  cannot  inherit  the  kingdom  of  God. "J  This 
of  course  looks  to  the  kingdom  in  glor3\  "Bat  seek 
ye  first  the  kingdom  of  God  and  his  righteousness, "§ — 
includes  the  reign  of  Christ  within,  and  without,  on  earth 
and  in  heaven. 

In  short,  every  one  who  will  examine  the  question 
thoroughly,  vrill  find,  that  the  phrase  "kingdom  of  God 
and  of  heaven,"  is  used  sometimes  for  the  visible  state 
of  things  on  earth,  sometimes  for  them  in  heaven,  and 
sometimes  for  the  inward  work  of  the  Spirit  on  the 
hearts  of  individuals,  as,  "  the  kingdom  of  God  is  within 
you" — but  it  generally  includes  the  perfect  as  well  as 
imperfect  state  of  Christ's  kingdojpa,  even  when  applied 
more  directly  to  the  Church  militant.  And  in  this  sense 
no  doubt  our  Saviour  used  it  with  reference  to  the  little 
children  when  he  said,  "  Of  such  is  the  kingdom  of  God." 
Such  are  true  members  of  the  true  spiritual  kingdom  of 
God,  as  well  as  of  his  nominal  kingdom. 

He  was  preparing  the  Church,  or  people  of  God  for 
a  more  spiritual  dispensation  on  earth.  They  had  been 
for  a  long  period  under  a  dispensation  that  was  adapted 
to  an  age  then  passed  away ;  and  many  abuses  and  cor- 
ruptions that  had  sprung  up,  must  now  be  reformed,  and 

■:^  Matt.  iii.  2.       f  ?,ratt..  xiii  47.       %  1  Cor.  xv.  50.      |  :\[att.  vi.  ?,3. 
18 


206  LITTLE  CHILDREN  MODEL  MEMBEIlS. 

a  more  spiritual  reign  commence.  To  be  members  of  this 
reformed  Church,  they  must  forsake  and  repent  of  those 
sins  which  they  had  allowed,  and  seek  after  righteous- 
ness and  purity  of  life,  which  would  prepare  them  for 
that  perfect  state  of  his  kingdom  in  glory,  of  which  this 
on  earth  is  the  beginning.  Hence  the  penitent,  seeking 
after  purity  of  heart,  and  governed  by  His  teaching, 
He  regarded  as  worthy  of  true  membership  in  that 
kingdom.  And,  therefore,  little  children,  who  had  no 
actual  sins  of  their  own,  and  whose  tender  minds  could 
be  taught  and  trained  in  the  right  way,  by  faithful 
leaders,  were,  par  excellence,  members  of  it. 

That  such  was  the  meaning  of  Christ  when  he  said, 
"Of  such  is  the  kingdom  of  God,"  is  the  more  obvious 
from  the  fact  that  he  held  them,  up  as  models  for  the 
imitation  of  those  who,  in  their  unfeeling  self-confidence, 
ordered  them  to  be  taken  away.  He  was  offended  at  the 
manifestation  of  such  temper.  And  hence  he  added, 
"Whosoever  sliall  not  receive  the  kingdom  of  God  as  a 
little  child,  shall  not  enter  therein.""^  That  is,  whosoever 
shall  not  humble  himself  to  be  taught  of  Christ,  and 
follow  his  instruction  as  a  little  child,  can  never  be  a  true 
member  of  his  kingdom  or  enter  into  its  perfect  state 
in  glory.  Men  may  enter  into  it  on  earth,  and  become 
members,  as  those  had  done  who  would  now  send  the  little 
children  away ;  but  unless  they  imitated  these  models, 
which  they  were  so  ready  to  reject,  and  follow  after  their 
innocency  and  teachable  tempers,  they  will  never  enter 
into  the  Church  triumphant.  As  yet  they  Avere  all  in  the 
Old  Testament  Church — the  little  children  as  well  as 

^  Mnrlv  X.  in. 


INNOCENCY  AND  TEACHABLE  TEMPER.  207 

those  to  whom  the  Saviour  addressed  himself.  The  day 
of  Pentecost  had  not  come.  But  Christ  was  preparing 
them  for  it.  He  was  reforming  abuses  and  pointing 
out  duties  ;  and  when  he  said  of  the  little  children,  "  Of 
such  is  the  kingdom  of  God,"  he  announced  a  fact 
which  they  all  knew,  so  far  as  the  membership  of  the 
visible  Church  was  concerned.  These  were  all  members 
of  the  Church  in  name ;  but  he  was  pointing  out  who 
were  the  true  worthy  members,  that  were  fitted  for  it 
under  the  more  spiritual  dispensation  on  earth,  about 
to  take  place,  and  its  final  state  in  glory. 

And  who,  we  ask  now,  is  better  fitted  for  such  a 
kingdom  than  the  little  children  for  whom  Christ  died  ? 
And  what  could  be  a  more  suitable  model  for  men  of  an 
overweening  self-confidence,  whose  need  of  humility  and 
tenderness  would  drive  the  lambs  away  from  their  shep- 
herd, than  the  gentleness  and  innocency  of  the  lambs 
themselves  ?  But  there  are  those  in  the  present  day 
who  reject  the  little  children  from  the  kingdom,  even 
though  Christ  rebuked  others  for  driving  them  from 
him,  and  informed  them  that  such  w^ere  models  for  imita- 
tion to  all  who  would  become  truly  the  members  of  that 
kingdom  !  They  reject  the  pattern,  but  accept  the  imi- 
tation !  Is  not  this  strange,  when  the  pattern  is  part 
and  parcel  of  the  same  material  ?  Little  children  are 
human  beings,  have  souls,  and  are  susceptible  of  plea- 
sure and  pain.  They  need  and  can  receive  religious 
blessings,  or  why  did  our  Saviour  pray  for  and  bless 
them.  ?  And  why  should  he  afterwards  reject  them  from 
his  kingdom,  and  receive  only  those  who  resembled  their 
innocency,  humility,  and  teachable  temper? 


208        THE  LITTLE  CHILDREN  INCLUDED. 

Could  a  man  utter  sophistry  more  untenable  than  that 
of  Dr.  Carson,  when  he  says,  " '  Of  such  is  the  kingdom,' 
cannot  mean  the  persons  themselves  spoken  of,  but  oth- 
ers like  them.  For  the  term  'such'  does  not  signify 
identity,  cannot  signify  identity,  but  likeness."  And, 
therefore,  it  cannot  include  the  little  children,  but  those 
like  them ! 

Where  did  he  learn  this  construction  of  language^- 
from  Scripture  usage  ?  When  St.  Paul  described  certain 
persons  as  "  corrupt  and  destitute  of  the  truth,  supposing 
that  gain  is  godliness,"*  and  Yfp.rned  Timothy  ''from 
Hucli  withdraw  thyself,"  did  he  mean  that  he  should 
withdraw  from  these  persons  iJtemselves,  or  only  from 
others  who  were  like  them  ? 

Again,  when  the  same  Apostle  tells  us  that — (Gal.  v. 
21.)  "  they  which  do  such  things  shall  not  inherit  the 
kingdom  of  God" — does  he  not  mean  the  very  things 
themselves,  as  well  as  others  of  like  character? 

And  yet  again,  when  St.  John  commends  the  charity 
of  Gains  and  says  of  certain  persons  (3  John  8)  "  We 
ought  therefore  to  receive  such,  that  we  might  be  fellow 
helpers  to  the  truth" — did  he  intend  that  the  persons 
themselves,  spoken  of  must  be  rejected,  and  others  like 
them  be  received  ?  what  nonsense  !  And  what  igno- 
rance of  Scriptural  usage,  to  assert  that  "  Of  such,  can- 
not signify  identity  but  likeness." 

Scriptural  usage,  on  the  contrary,  requires  the  con- 
struction "of  such  is  the  kingdom  of  Heaven"  to  in- 
clude tlie  very  persons  pointed  out,  and  those  who  are 
like   them.     And   so  we  believe  the   Saviour  intended 

*  1  Tim.  vL  4,  5. 


PROMISE  TO   PARENTS  AND  CHILDREN.  209 

to  include  the  little  children  ^-ith  all  who  should  he  like 
them,  and  in  many  points  they  were  more  highly  esteemed 
by  him  than  were  others.  And  such  was  the  sentiment  of 
a  cotemporary  of  the  Apostles.  Hermas,  who  lived  and 
wrote  in  the  Apostolic  age,  says,  "  All  infants  are  valued 
by  the  Lord  and  esteemed  first  of  alV'^' 

2.  The  objection  that  Christ  did  not  baptize  the  little 
children,  is  scarcely  worthy  of  notice  in  this  place,  as  all 
A^io  have  read  their  Bible  attentively  know,  that  the 
Saviour  "  did  not  baptize,  but  his  disciples."  He  never- ' 
theless  taught  the  people  and  prepared  the  way  for  the 
Gospel  in  its  fullness,  and  by  signs  and  words  testified 
that  little  children  were  included  with  their  fathers  in 
the  atonement,  and  have  an  interest  and  claim  in  the 
covenant  of  Redemption. 

Hence  in  the  first  sermon  preached  under  the  Gospel 
Dispensation,  on  the  day  of  Pentecost,  the  promise  made 
to  the  children  as  well  as  to  their  fathers  was  particularly 
pointed  out.f 

Acts  ii.  38,  39.  "  Then  Fetor  said  unto  tliem,  Re- 
jjejit  and  be  baptized  every  one  of  yon^  in  the  name  of 
Jesus  Christ,  for  the  remission  of  sins,  and  ye  shall 
receive  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Grhost.  For  the  promise 
is  to  you  and  to  your  children  and  to  all  that  are 
afar  off,  even  as  many  as  the  Lord  our  God  shall  call." 

Here  children  are  expressly  named  with  their  parents  ; 
and  by  a  Jew,  addressing  Jews,  who  had  always  been 
accustomed  to  have  their  children  under  the  same  cove- 
nant with  themselves.  Up  to  this  moment  the  children 
of  the  preacher  and  people  had  all  alike  received  the  ini- 

*  Simil.  9,  c.  29.  f  Acts  ii.  38,  39. 

18=^ 


210  INFLUENCE  OE   EDUCATION. 

tiatory  rite  of  religion,  and  if  no^Y  for  tlie  first  time,  their 
children  are  to  be  included,  is  not  this  of  all  language 
the  most  singular  to  use.  He  quotes  from  the  Old 
Testament,  paraphrases  the  promises  made  therein,  ap- 
plies them  to  their  children,  and  jet  children  must 
not  any  longer  be  made  partakers  of  the  promises ! 
Would  we  use  such  language  to  prepare  men  for  such  a 
change,  or  would  a  Jew  likely  infer  that  his  little  chil- 
dren were  to  be  shut  out  from  the  privileges  of  their 
fathers,  from  such  language  ?  It  can  scarcely  admit  of 
a  doubt  that  he  would  understand  it  in  any  other  way, 
than  not  to  include  the  young  children  with  their  fathers. 
This  must  be  evident  to  any  one,  who  has  the  power  of 
dismissing  from  his  mind  for  a  moment,  surrounding  cir- 
cumstances, and  of  putting  himself  in  the  place  of  a  Jew. 
It  is  not  at  all  wonderful  that  persons  who  have  been 
brought  up  under  Antipedobaptist  influence,  should  at 
first  be  disposed  to  refer  the  words  of  St.  Peter  in  this 
passage,  to  posterity  grown  up.  Because  they  read  it 
Avith  entirely  different  feelings  and  different  views  from 
a  Jew.  They  are  disposed  to  construe  everything  ac- 
cording to  the  principles  already  instilled  into  their 
minds.  They  look  through  a  different  medium  from 
that  through  which  a  Jevf  from  education  must  look. 
And  so  it  is  in  all  cases  where  children  are  referred  to 
in  the  New  Testament.  Such  persons  require  some  spe- 
cification for  any  departure  from  the  principles  under 
which  they  themselves  have  been  brought  up,  or  which, 
from  other  causes,  they  have  adopted  ;  whereas  the  true 
state  of  the  case  is,  as  every  unprejudiced  mind  can 
see,  that  somd"  specification  is  required  wherever  there  is 


INFANT  MEMBERSHIP  IMPLIED.  211 

a  departure  from  the  established  principles  and  known 
feelings  of  those  to  whom  the  words  were  at  the  time 
addressed.  It  is  well  known  to  every  biblical  scholar, 
that  the  Jews,  and  all  connected  with  them,  considered 
their  young  children  entitled  to  the  same  covenant  privi- 
leges to  which  they  themselves  were  entitled  :  and  hence, 
must,  as  a  thing  of  course,  construe  everything  said  in  re- 
lation to  children  according  to  such  views,  unless  some  spe- 
cification be  made  to  the  contrary.  What  then  could  they 
suppose  St.  Peter  meant,  other  than  to  include  their 
young  children  at  that  present  time  ?  Or  how  could  he 
who  was  himself  a  Jew,  expect  them  to  understand  him 
otherwise,  without  some  specification  to  the  contrary?* 
The  fact  is,  Infant  Church-membership  is  taken  for 
granted  throughout  the  New  Testament,  just  as  the 
being  of  a  God,  is  taken  for  granted  in  the  Old 
Testament  Scriptures ;  and  any  attentive  student  who 
will  read  the  New  Testament,  with  this  truth  before  his 
mind,  will  see  how  exactly  every  part  corresponds  with 
this  truth.  But  as  soon  as  one  begins  to  read  it,  vath 
the  opposite  opinion  in  his  mind,  he  will  find  himself 
constantly  reduced  to  the  necessity  of  giving  up  broad, 
plain  principles  of  interpretation,  and  looking  for  some 
hole  to  escape.  Thus  it  is  with  the  passage  before  us. 
Such  readers  take  for  granted  that  Infant  baptism  is  not 
taught  in  the  Scriptures.     Wherefore,  when  the  Apostle 

■^  Verses  41  and  42  are  sometimes  referred  to  as  explanatory  of  St. 
Peter's  meaning.  But  ihcy  only  refer  to  the  acts  of  responsible 
agents.  Possibly  very  few  children  -were  present  on  the  day  of  Pen- 
tecost, but  if  many^  St.  Luke's  custom  was  to  speak  only  of  the  acts 
of  responsible  perspns  and  heads  of  families,  as  in  the  case  of  Lydia, 
and  the  Jailer,  for  neither  the  names  nor  deeds  of  any  of  their  children 
at  their  baptism  are  recorded  by  him. 


212     DEFECTIVE  RULES  OF  INTERPRETATION. 

declares  to  the  penitent  multitude,  ''  the  promise  is  to 
you  and  to  your  children" — they  cannot  receive  it  in  its 
broad,  natural  sense,  but  give  the  passage  a  limited  ap- 
plication, which  excludes  a  portion  of  their  children. 
So  likewise,  in  the  passage  just  disposed  of,  where  the 
Saviour  says  in  regard  to  the  little  children  vrhom  he 
took  up  in  his  arms,  "  Of  such  is.  the  kingdom  of  God" 
— they  set  to  work  and  exclude  the  children  themselves 
(the  very  subjects  of  the  conversation)  and  limit  the 
passage  to  only  such  as  resemble  -them  in  certain 
particulars.  Again,  the  commission  given  the  Apostles 
"to  disciple  all  nations,  baptizing  them,"  etc.,  they,  in- 
stead of  receiving  its  broad,  general  sense,  limit  it  to 
only  believers.  And  so  on,  with  every  passage  bearing 
on  the  Church-membership  of  infants. 

Novr  this  is  precisely  the  reverse  of  the  order  that 
ought  to  be  observed  in  regard  to  those  passages  refer- 
ring to  children.  We  must  remember  that  the  writers 
of  the  New  Testament  were  all  Jews,  and  of  course  to  a 
great  extent,  under  the  influence  of  previous  education, 
and  that  all  departures  from  established  principles,  rather 
than  the  continuation  of  them,  would  be  marked  by  spe- 
cifications. 

But  it  has  also  been  argued  that  the  Apostle  limits 
baptism  in  this  place,  by  repentance,  saying,  "  Repent 
and  be  baptized,  every  one  of  you,"  etc. 

The  irrelevancy  of  this  objection  will  be  seen,  by  sim- 
ply calling  to  remembrance  the  fact  that  the  Apostle 
replied  to  persons  who  had  committed  actual  sins  of  their 
own,  and  who  had  asked  what  they  must  do  ?  and  said 
to  them,  "Repent  and  be  baptized,  every  one  of  you." 


CHILDREN  SUSCEPTIBLE  OF  GllACE.  213 

Just  as  any  Pedobaptist  would,  under  the  same  circum- 
stances, at  tlie  present  day.  Not  one  word  is  said  as  to  the 
repentance  of  their  children,  who  had  not  committed 
actual  sin,  but  who  were  affected  by  original  sins,  yet  he 
tells  them  the  promise  is  to  their  children,  as  well  as  to 
themselves.  • 

Again,  it  has  been  objected,  that  the  "  promise"  re- 
ferred to  by  the  Apostle  is  the  "  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost," 
and  not  the  great  promise  made  to  Abraham  when  God 
entered  into  covenant  with  him  and  promised  ''  to  be  a 
God  unto  him  and  his  seed  after  him,"  to  which  it 
is  supposed  generally  to  refer.  The  reply  to  be 
made,  is,  that  so  far  as  the  question  before  us  is 
concerned,  the  result  will  be  the  same  in  either  case.  If 
to  the  promises  in  the  Abrahamic  covenant,  it  is  beyond 
all  doubt  that  young  children  are  included,  because,  at 
the  very  time  that  covenant  was  established,  young  chil-' 
dren  were  by  express  law  received  into  it.  But  if  we 
refer  it  to  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  what  obstacle 
does  it  oppose  ?  Cannot  children  receive  grace  as  well 
as  others  ?  Do  they  not  need  it,  to  counteract  fallen 
nature  as  well  as  others  ?  If  they  are  capable  of  sin 
through  Adam,  why  not  of  grace  through  Christ  ?  Or 
why  pray  for  their  spiritual  benefit,  if  they  be  not  sus- 
ceptible of  such  a  thing  ?  If  children  cannot  receive 
the  Holy  Ghost — how  is  it  St.  John  is  said  to  have  been 
filled  with  "  the  Holy  Ghost  even  from  his  mother's 
womb  ?"  Luke  i.  15.  Isa.  xlix.  Herein  lies  the  error 
of  such — they  assume  that  no  benefit  can  be  conferred 
on  children  at  their  baptism,  which  they  ought  first 
to  prove.     It  is   not  our  object  at  present  to   say  to 


214  THE  GOSPEL  INVITATION. 

what  extent  or  in  what  way,  spiritual  benefit  is  conferred, 
whether  in  the  act  of  baptism  itself,  or  through  the 
pra^^ers  of  God's  people  ofiered  up  for  the  child,  or  in 
consequence  of  covenanted  associations,  helps  and  privi- 
leges, or  through  all  these  separately  and  conjointly. 
Certain  it  is,  from  Scripture  testimony,  that  young  chil- 
dren may  receive  the  influence  of  the  Holy  Ghost,*  and 
spiritual  graces,  as  well  as  blessings  of  an  external  nature. 

Lastly,  it  has  been  objected  that  this  promise  is  limi- 
ted by  the  latter  clause  to  "as  many  as  the  Lord  our 
God  shall  call."  That  is,  "to  such  as  can  believe, 
and  are  effectually  called  unto  salvation."  This  objec- 
tion needs  only  a  passing  notice,  since  it  is  now  generally 
conceded  by  the  most  eminent  commentators  of  all 
shades  of  doctrine  that  the  call  here  referred  to,  means 
the  call  made  through  the  Gospel.  Namely,  that  the 
"promise"  extends  to  all  wliQ  shall  be  invited — that  sal- 
vation is  offered  to  all  who  shall  hear  its  joyful  sound — 
to  as  many  as  by  that  Gospel  are  called  to  repentance. 
The  plain  natural  rendering  of  the  text,  therefore,  is, 
"that  the  promise  is  to  the  Jews,  and  to  their  children, 
and  to  all  who  are  afar  off.  Gentiles  as  well  as  Jews — 
even  to  as  many  as  the  Lord  our  God  shall  call,"f  i.  e. 
wherever  the  Gospel  is  preached,  or  this  call  is  pub- 
lished. J 

Let  us  see  next  how  some  of  the  other  Apostles  ap- 
pear to  have    construed   the    commission  under  which 

*  Luke  i.  15.     Lsa.  xlix.     Ps.  xxii.  9.  f  Ephesians  ii,  13,  17. 

J  The  reader  will  observe  that  these  arguments,  though  corrobora- 
tive of  each  other,  are  yet  distinct  and  separate,  and  that  he  may 
reject  any  one  of  tliem  if  unsatisfactory  to  himself,  without  affecting 
the  authority  of  the  others. 


BAPTISM  OF  LYDIA  AND  FAMILY.  215 

they  acted.  We  read  tliat  Paul,  Silas,  and  others,  in 
travelling  and  preaching  the  Gospel,  visited  a  certain  town 
called  Philippi,  in  Macedonia,  and  that  during  their  stay 
there,  they  baptized  two  families — and  these  are  the 
only  baptisms  mentioned  whilst  there — both  of  them  of 
whole  families.  The  first  was  the  family  of  a  certain 
woman  named  Lydia. 

Acts  xvi.  13,  19.  ''And  on  the  Sahhath  day  we  ivent 
out  of  the  city  hy  a  river  side,  ivhere  frayer  ivas  wont  to 
he  made^  and  tve  sat  dotvn  and  spake  to  the  ivomen  ivhich 
resorted  tliither.  And  a  certain  zuoman  named  Lydia^ 
a  seller  of  purple,  of  the  city  of  Thyatira,  ivhich  ivor- 
shipped  God,  heard  us,  luhose  heart  the  Lord  opened, 
that  she  attended  unto  the  things  ivhich  were  spoken  of 
Paid.  And  when  she  tvas  baptized,  and  her  house- 
hold, she  besought  us,  saying.  If  ye  have  judged  me 
faithful  to  the  Lord,  come  into  my  house  and  abide  there, 
and  she  constrained  us." 

In  this  account  nothing  is  said  of  the  faith,  names,  or 
acts  of  any  other  member  of  the  household,  but  of  the 
head  of  it.  The  baptism  of  the  other  members  of  the 
family  referred  to,  was  a  thing  of  course,  when  the 
head  of  it  believed.  The  whole  affair  is  recorded,  just  as 
if  the  privileges  enjoyed  by  the  head  of  the  family,  in 
matters  of  this  kind,  were  the  same  under  the  Christian 
dispensation  as  they  had  been  under  the  Jewish.  All  of 
which  is  in  perfect  harmony  with  the  views  we  have 
already  advanced. 

Shortly  afterwards,  Paul  and  Silas  are  apprehended 
and  cast  into  prison.  The  jailer  is  charged  to  keep 
them   safely,  who   thrusts  them   into  the   inner   prison, 


216  BAPTISM  OF   JAILER  AND  ALL  HIS. 

and  makes  their  feet  fast  in  the  stocks.  At  midnight 
an  earthquake  throws  open  the  prison  doors,  looses  the 
prisoners  from  the  stocks,  and  awakes  the  jailer  ;  who 
seeing  the  prison  doors  open,  supposes  the  prisoners 
have  fled,  and  is  ahout  to  kill  himself.  But  Paul  calls 
to  him  to  do  himself  no  harm,  for  the  prisoners  were  all 
there — none  had  escaped.  The  jailer  called  for  a  light, 
sprang  in  and  fell  dovfn  at  the  Apostles'  feet ;  and  hav- 
ing "brought  them  out,  said,  Sirs,  what  must  I  do  to 
be  saved  ?"* 

Acts  xvi.  31-33.  ''Afid  they  said,  Believe  on  the 
Lord  Jesus  Clirist,  and  tlioii  slialt  he  saved,  and  thy 
house.  And  they  spake  unto  him  the  ivord  of  tlie  Lord, 
and  to  all  that  wei^e  in  his  house.  And  he  took  them 
the  same  hour  of  the  night,  and  washed  their  stripes ; 
and  was  baptized,  he  and  all  his,  straightivay.'' 

Here  is  another  case,  in  which  no  name  or  act  of  any 
member  of  the  family  is  recorded  but  that  of  the  head 
of  it.  And  yet  every  member  of  it  was  baptized  the 
same  hour  of  the  night,  the  jailer  and  all  his  straiyht- 
luay.  No  surprise  or  unusual  joy  is  manifested  at  the 
baptism  of  the  whole  family,  but  all  is  related  as  if  a 
thing  to  be  expected,  that  when  the  jailer  believed  and 
was  baptized,  "all  of  his"  would  be  baptized  likewise. 
Precisely  such  an  account  as  we  should  expect  a  Jew  to 
give,  when,  like  pious  Joshua,  he  could  say  for  himself 
and  all  his,  "  As  for  me  and  my  house,  we  will  serve  the 
Lord."  Hence,  he  would  take  all  .belonging  to  him, 
and  bring  them  with  himself  into- the  Christian  cove- 
nant, as  soon  as  he  believed. 

--  Act?  xvi.  23.  ?>0. 


BAPTISM  OF  STEPHANAS  AND  FAMILY.  217 

So  was  the  reply  of  the  Apostles  to  the  inquiry  What 
shall  I  do  to  be  saved  ?  of  the  same  character.  The 
answer  was,  "  Believe  on  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and  thou 
shalt  be  saved,  and  thy  house ;"  that  is,  thou  shalt 
bring  salvation  to  thyself  and  house.  Faith  in  Christ 
is  the  way  to  attain  safety,  and  by  it  you  may  bring 
yourself  and  family  into  a  state  of  covenanted  grace. 

These  Apostles,  like  St.  Peter,  remembered  the  bless- 
ings that  would  redound  to  their  children  with  their 
parents.  Believe,  and  thou  and  thy  house  shall  be  saved 
— brought  into  a  state  of  salvation  covenanted  in  Christ 
Jesus. 

The  Apostle  Paul  introduces  the  baptism  of  the 
household  of  Stephanas  in  exactly  the  same  manner. 
He  mentions  it  in  connection  with  the  baptism  of  two 
other  individuals,  without  any  restriction  as  to  age  or 
sex. 

1  Cor.  I.  14-16.  ''Ithanh  God  that  Ihaptizcd none 
of  you  hut  Crispus  and  Grams,  lest  any  should  say  that 
I  baptized  in  my  oivn  name.  And  I  haptized  also  the 
household  of  Stephanas  ;  besides,  I  knoiv  not  that  I  bap- 
tized any  other.'' 

Having  heard  that  there  were  contentions  in  the 
Church  of  Corinth,  and  that  the  disciples  were  calling 
themselves  by  the  names  of  the  different  ministers  who 
had  baptized  them,  he  congratulates  himself  that  there 
were  but  few  there  who  could  call  themselves  by  his 
name.  He  only  remembered  two,  Crispus  and  Gains, 
besides  the  family  of  Stephanas. 

The  manyier  in  which  family  baptisms  are  referred  to 
in  the  Scriptures,  must  ever  strike  the  mind  of  the  at- 
19 


218  FAITH  AND  ACTS  OF  HEADS 

tciitive  reader,  as  opposed  to  those  who  advocate  only 
believers'  baptism.  If  only  believers  Vfere  baptized, 
why,  (one  is  led  to  ask,)  is  no  restriction  made  in  regard 
to  young  children  in  these  cases  ?  Or  if  no  young  chil- 
dren belonged  to  them,  why  are  we  not  informed  that 
all  believed,  or  that  all  repented,  as  well  as  that  all 
were  baptized  ?  Why  are  they  recorded,  as  if  every- 
thing depended  on  the  heads  of  these  families  ?  Do  not 
these  things  go  far  to  show,  that  no  radical  change  had 
been  made  in  regard  to  the  principle  of  receiving  young, 
children  with  their  parents  into  covenanted  privileges  ? 
For  if  a  change  had  been  made  on  this  point,  we  might 
certainly  expect  to  see  something  corresponding  in  the 
record — instead  of  which,  every  case  is  recorded  in  pre- 
cisely the  manner  they  would  have  been  under  the  old 
dispensation,  in  the  event  baptism  had  been  merely 
added  to  it.  Suppose  we  were  to  meet  in  the  records 
of  some  missionary  of  the  present  day,  such  cases  as 
these  to  which  we  have  just  referred — say,  for  instance, 
he  records  a  visit  to  some  town  where  he  baptized  two 
families,  and  these  the  only  baptisms  performed  by  him 
whilst  there  ;  he  says  nothing  of  the  faith  or  acts  of  any 
one,  but  the  liead  of  each  family,  and  speaks  of  their 
family  baptisms  in  a  manner  that  indicates  no  more  sur- 
prise than  individual  baptism  ?  And  suppose  we  find  a 
few  pages  further  on,  in  a  letter  to  a  church  in  another 
city,  mention  made  of  another  family  and  two  indi- 
viduals, and  that  these  were  all  that  he  baptized  there 
also — and  yet  nothing  is  said,  to  indicate  that  family  bap- 
tism was  less  common,  or  in  these  cases  more  a  matter 
of  gratitude  than  individual  baptism,  would  we  not  con- 


OF  FAMILIES  ONLY  RECORDED.        219 

elude  that  tliis  missionary  belonged  to  a  ChiTrcli  that 
ordered  the  baptism  of  the  young  children  with  their 
parents  ?  Could  we  come  to  any  other  conclusion,  when 
there  were  only  two  baptisms  in  one  place,  and  both  of 
these  whole  families — in  another,  one  family  and  two 
other  individuals,  without  one  word  of  restriction,  or  of 
exception  in  the  case  of  the  young  children  ?  Most  cer- 
tainly every  reader  would  infer  that  this  missionary  was 
a  Pedobaptist,  or  one  who  baptizes  young  children. 
Then  we  must  conclude  the  Apostles  were  Pedobaptists, 
unless  it  can  be  made  to  appear  that  there  were  no  chil- 
dren in  those  families. 

1.  But  where  is  the  evidence  to  that  effect  ?  It  has 
been  said,  that  the  40th  verse  of  the  chapter  recording 
the  baptism  of  Lydia  and  her  family,  shows  that  there 
were  no  children  in  it.  Let,  us  examine  it.  Acts  xvi. 
40.  "  And  they  went  out  of  the  prison  and  entered 
into  the  house  of  Lydia ;  and  when  they  had  seen  the 
brethren,  they  comforted  them  and  departed."  Now 
what  does  this  verse  mean,  but  simply  that  when  Paul 
and  Silas  were  let  out  of  prison,  they  went  to  the  house 
of  Lydia,  at  which  they  met  the  brethren,  and  when 
they  had  comforted  them,  both  by  their  presence  and 
words,  they  departed.  Some  have  endeavored  to  make 
this  verse  support  the  opinion,  that  the  "  brethren  com- 
forted," were  only  the  members  of  Lydia's  family,  and 
hence  they  must  all  have  reached  the  years  of  discretion 
to  »be  able  to  receive  comfort.  Such  objectors  must 
have  paid  very  little  attention  to  the  whole  narrative,  or 
else  they  would  have  seen  that  Timotheus  and  Luke 
wereifellow-travellers  with  Paul  and  Silas,  and  were  at 


220  BRETHREN  AT   LYDIA'S  HOUSE. 

the  time  lodging  at  Lyclia's  house.  Acts  xvi.  3.  ^'  Him, 
(Timotheus,)  Paul  would  have  to  go  forth  with  him." 
(11,  12  verses.)  Loosing  from  Troas,  ive  (Luke  the 
writer,  with  the  others,)  came  with  a  straight  course  to 
Samothracia,  and  the  next  day  to  Neapolis,  and  from 
thence  to  Philippi,  which  is  the  chief  city  of  that  part 
of  Macedonia  and  a  colony,  and  we  were  in  that  city 
abiding  certain  days."  Verse  15,  "  And  when  she 
(Lydia)  was  baptized  and  her  household,  she  besought 
us,  saying,  if  ye  have  judged  me  to  be  faithful  to  the 
Lord,  come  into  my  house,  and  abide  there  :  and  she  con- 
strained us."  Who  were  these  {we  and  us)  constrained 
to  abide  at  her  house?  Evidently  Paul,  Silas,  Timothy, 
and  Luke.  The  whole  company  lodged  at  Lydia's. 
''  And  it  came  to  pass  as  ive  went  to  prayer,  a  certain 
damsel,  possessed  with  the  spirit  of  divination,  met  us, 
which  brought  her  master  much  gain  by  soothsaying : 
the  same  followed  Paul  and  us,  &c.  And  when  her 
master  saw  that  the  hope  of  their  gain  was  gone,  they 
caught  Paul  and  Silas  and  drew  them  into  the  market- 
place," &c.,  verse  19.  They  were  afterwards  thrown 
into  prison  and  remained  there  one  night,  but  Luke  and 
Timothy  were  not  with  them. 

The  next  day  Paul  and  Silas  w^ere  released,  and  came 
to  the  house  of  Lydia,  and  met  there,  Timothy,  Luke, 
Lydia,  and  perhaps  the  "  damsel"  out  of  whom  was 
cast  the  Pythonic  spirit.  To  which  number  may  have 
been  added  also,  the  jailer  and  others.  So  that  these, 
beyond  a  doubt,  were  the  brethren  whom  Paul  and  Silas 
"  comforted."  Por  so  far  as  Lydia  is  concerned,  there 
is  not  a  word  going  to  show  that  one  of  her  family  was 


lydia's  faith  governed  all.  221 

able  to  believe.  On  the  contrary,  everything  connected 
with  the  baptism  of  her  family  is  put  in  the  singular 
number,  as  if  all  depended  on  her  alone. '^  "  Her  heart 
was  opened  to  attend  to  the  things  spoken.  Slie  be- 
sought us,  if  ye  have  jugded  me  faithful,  come  into  my 
house."  Nothing  is  said  of  any  one  of  her  family  in  con- 
junction with  herself.  It  does  not  read,  our  Jiouse,  or 
if  you  have  judged  tis  faithful,  or  that  the  members  of 
her  family  attended.  Nor  should  we  have  known  that 
she  had  a  family,  had  they  not  been  mentioned  as  bap- 
tized at  the  same  time  with  her, — "  and  when  she  was 
baptized  and  her  family."  Instead  of  circumstances 
showing  that  her  children  were  grown  up,  everything 
in  the  narrative  goes  to  prove,  they  were  minors.  Lydia 
was  a  native  of  Thyatira,  residing  at  this  time  in  Phi- 
lippi,  she  could  afford  accommodations  to  Paul  and  his 
three  companions,  and  constrained  them  to  abide  at  her 
house.  The  baptism  of  her  01x05,  "house,"  is,  strictly 
speaking,  an  example  0^ family  haptism  without  restric- 
tion of  age  or  sex.  And  vre  are  bound  to  receive  it 
as  a  case  of  promiscuous  family  baptism.  Just  as  if 
informed  at  the  present  time  that  a  "  certain  lady  and 
her  family  were  baptized  on  a  particular  day,  and  no 
specification  made  as  to  ago  or  numbers." 

2.  In  the  case  of  the  jailer,  it  has  been  argued  that 
there  were  no  young  children  in  his  family,  because  we 
are  informed  the  Apostles  ''  spake  unto  him  the  word  of 
the  Lord  and  to  all  that  were  in  his  house."  Acts  xvi. 
32.     Why,  says  the  objector,  did  they  speak  the  word 

*  Taylor  A.  B. 

19* 


222  THE  JAILER  REJOICED. 

of  the  Lord  to  all,  if  all  were  not  able  to  understand  it  ? 
We  might  as  well  ask,  Why  does  a  minister  of  the  pre- 
sent day  speak  the  word  of  the  Lord  to  all  his  congre- 
gation when  a  part  of  them  are  children  ?  The  earth- 
quake and  the  alarm  of  the  jailer,  we  may  well  suppose, 
awoke  all  in  the  house,  and  that  they  assembled  to- 
gether in  the  same  room — guards  and  assistants  probably 
assembled  with  his  family.  And  the  Apostles  preached 
or  explained  the  Christian  religion  to  all  present,  to  the 
oLxia,  "household" — and  "the  jailer  and  all  his,  were 
baptized  straightway;"  i.  g.,  all  his  own  immediate 
family,  his  olxo^,  his  house-seed — but  not  ot?fta,  ''  the 
household."  We  will  show  the  difference  presently. 
Nothing  is  said  or  done  but  what  might  have  occurred, 
had  all  his  own  been  young  children. 

3.  Again,  it  is  sometimes  affirmed  that  all  the  jailer's 
family  were  believers,  because,  after  their  baptism,  it  is 
written  in  the  34th  verse,  "  He  set  meat  before  them 
(Apostles)  and  rejoiced,  believing  in  God  with  all  his 
house."  The  word  "believing"  is  made  to  apply  to  all 
his  house,  as  if  all  believed  in  God,  and  rejoiced  with 
him.  But  the  error  of  this  interpretation  becomes  mani- 
fest by  merely  referring  to  the  original  Greek,  which 
shows  that  '^rejoiced  and  believing  are  both  in  the  singu- 
lar number,  and  may  only  apply  to  the  jailer  himself." 

Kat  -/jya^'Kiaaato  Tiavotxo  TiBTiiaTftvxcoi  tio  Qsoj    "  and    he  rcjoiccd 

with  all  his  house,  (at  the  head  of  his  family)  he  having 
believed  in  God."  The  jailer  having  believed,  rejoiced 
with,  among,  or  in  the  midst  of  his  family. 

This  is  the  literal  rendering  of  the  sentence,  "  He 
rejoiced,"   ^^  he   having   believed   in    God."     Not  the^ 


HOUSE  AND    HOUSEHOLD.  223 

rejoiced,  or  they  believed.  The  whole  is  recorded  as 
if  everything  depended  on  the  father's  agency.  And 
had  it  been  otherwise,  no  doubt  it  would  have  been  writ- 
ten, He  and  his  house,  or  they  all  rejoiced,  and  they 
believed ;  or  some  allusion  would  have  been  made  to  the 
faith  and  acts  of  others. 

Of  the  same  character  is  the  answer  to  the  inquiry 
of  the  jailer.  "Sirs,  what  must  I  do  to  be  saved?" 
"  Believe  on  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and  thou  shalt  be 
saved,  and  thy  house.''  Sis  faith  only  pointed  to,  as 
the  mediam  of  the  blessings  to  be  received  by  himself 
and  his  children — his  acts  only  recorded  when  the  bless- 
ing was  given  to  them  all. 

The  Apostles  always  make  a  distinction  between 
{oixoi)  "house,"  and  (otxca)  "household."  By  "house" 
i\\Qj mQdiXi  family — children.  And  by  "household"  they 
include  the  domestics,  or  servants,  and  all  connected 
with  the  establishment.  The  term  01x05  means  literally 
"house,"  or  "dwelling,"  but,  metaphorically,  the  seed, 
descendants,  immediate  family — as  when  we  speak  of 
the  "house  of  David,"  or  "house  of  Israel."  But 
OLXLO.  "household,"  is  a  different  word,  of  different  gen- 
der, and  embraces  those  received  into  the  family — ser- 
vants, attendants,  and  appendages,  making  up  all  in 
any  way  identified  with  the  house.  And  the  Apostles 
always  observed  this  distinction,  but  our  translators 
seemed  to  have  overlooked  it  in  some  places.  The  ad- 
dress, or  sermon,  was  delivered  before  the  oixia  "  house- 
hold"— all  who  belonged  to  the  establishment — but  only 
the  jailer  and  family,  or  children,  were  baptized. 

And  so  it  was  only  Lydia  and  her  ot^os  "house,"  not 


224  HOUSEHOLD  OF  STEPHANAS. 

''household,"  as  it  is  translated,  but  Lydia  and  her 
children,  that  were  baptized.  This  is  confirmed  by  the 
Syriac  version  which  reads  ''children^''  and  which,  as 
before  remarked,  was  completed  according  to  Mich^lis 
and  others  about  the  time  of  St.  John's  death- — certainly 
early  in  the  second  century.  According  to  this  version, 
(the  received  rule  of  faith  among  the  Christians  of  Syria 
and  Armenia  from  the  beginning,)  '''Lydia  and  her 
c7iildre7i,  the  jailer  with  all  his  children,  and  the  chil- 
dren of  Stephanas  zvere  haiotized.''  The  jailer  could 
not  have  been  a  very  old  man,  for  his  acts  are  such  as 
we  should  ascribe  to  the  rashness  and  vigor  of  early 
manhood.  His  first  thought,  was  to  kill  himself!  Age 
is  more  deliberate.  Next  he  ''sprang  in"  with  the 
vigor  and  activity,  as  indicated  in  the  original,  of  one 
in  the  prime  of  life — not  of  old  age,  and  the  father  of 
a  grown  up  family.  Wherefore  everything  connected 
with  these  cases  harmonizes  with  the  doctrine  of  family 
baptism,  including  young  children ;  and  as  soon  as 
you  adopt  the  opposite  opinion,  every  incident  needs 
explanation. 

So  the  Apostle  Paul  tells  us  he  baptized  the  [otxov) 
family  of  Stephanas,  but  afterwards  refers  to  the  (oixio.) 
"household"  of  Stephanas  as  having  "addicted  them- 
selves to  the  ministry  of  the  saints ;"  .that  is,  the  care 
of  attending  to  the  wants  of  poor  saints,  and  the  duties 
of  hospitality.  In  the  first  place,  he  speaks  of  the 
baptism  of  his  children — for  otzoj  applies  to  one's  own 
children,  while  otxta  includes  servants  and  all  others  liv- 
ing in  the  family.  And  because  some  eight  or  ten  years 
after  the  baptism  of  the  family,  he  tells  us  the  "  house- 


FAMILY  BAPTISM  COMMON.  225 

hold"  were  active  in  a  certain  duty;  some  liave  inferred 
that  there  were  no  children  in  that  family  when  they 
were  all  baptized.  But  there  is  no  proof  that  there 
were  not  little  children  among  them  when  the  baptism 
took  place,  or  even  at  this  last  point  of  time.  The  "  house- 
hold," or  several  of  its  members,  may  have  done  much 
for  the  poor  saints,  and  yet  some  of  the  children  still  be 
too  young  to  act  as  responsible  moral  agents.  It  is  the 
manner  in  which  these  and  all  family  baptisms  are  ex- 
pressed or  implied  in  the  Holy  Scriptures,  that  demands 
our  particular  attention. 

The  baptism  of  several  families  in  the  New  Tes- 
tament is  to  be  learned  also  merely  from  implication — no 
special  notice  being  taken  of  the  event.  We  have  suffi- 
cient reason  for  the  belief  that  the  families  of  Crispus 
and  of  Onesiphorus,  of  Aristobulus  and  Narcissus,  and 
also  of  Cornelius,  were  baptized;  but  so  usual  were 
family  baptisms  that  the  Holy  Spirit  deemed  it  sufficient 
merely  to  imply  the  fact,  as  in  numerous  cases  of  indi- 
vidual baptisms.  And  had  the  usual  course  of  admitting 
their  little  children  into  covenant  with  God  been  de- 
parted from,  and  only  heads  of  families,  and  those 
capable  of  self-responsibility,  admitted  to  baptism,  must 
not  the  character  of  these  records  have  been  different 
and  family  baptisms  less  common  ? 

"Being  myself  convinced,"  writes  the  remarkable 
author  of  Apostolic  Baptism,  after  a  learned  and  labo- 
rious examination  of  the  subject,  "  that  the  Apostles 
practised-  Infant  baptism,  and  that  the  Evangelists 
meant  to  tell  us  so,  I  affirm  that  the  natural  import  of 
the  term  otxoj  "family,"  includes  children  of  all  ages. 
In  proof,  I  offer  fifty  examples ;    and  if  fifty  are  not 


226  GREATER  PROBABILITY. 

sufficient,  I  offer  a  hundred;  and  if  a  hundred  are  not 
sufficient,  I  offer  two  hundred ;  and  if  two  hundred  are 
not  sufficient,  four  hundred."* 

Now  in  questions  that  do  not  allow  of  absolute  demon- 
stration, we  are  bound  to  follow  the  stronger  probability. 
Neither  party  can  be  required  to  prove  the  presence  or 
absence  of  little  children  in  these  families;  but  which  is 
the  more  pi^ohahle  under  all  the  circumstances  noted, 
that  there  were  no  little  children  in  any  of  them,  or  that 
there  were  at  least  in  some,  if  not  in  all  ? 

When  called  upon  to  answer  this  question,  can  there 
be  a  doubt  as  to  the  stronger  probability  ?  Visit  eight 
families  promiscuously  in  this  city,  and  is  it  probable 
that  you  Avill  find  no  young  children  belonging  to  even  one 
of  them  all,  or  to  half  of  them  ?  Visit  three  families — 
representing  the  jailer's,  Lydia's,  and  that  of  Stepha- 
nas— and  take  them  promiscuously,  and  which  is  the 
more  probable,  that  you  will  find  no  children  in  one  out 
of  the  three,  or  that  you  will  find  them  in  two  of  the 
three,  or  in  all  three  ?  Yes,  w^e  may  may  take  the  fam- 
ilies or  houses  on  any  street,  or  through  any  district  of 
country,  and  we  shall  find  little  children  in  a  large  ma- 
jority of  them  all,  instead  of  not  in  one  out  of  three. 
Therefore,  as  a  question  of  lorohahilities,  the  answer 
admits  of  no  doubt.  No  man  can  hesitate  for  a  moment 
to  determine  on  which  side  lies  the  stronger  probability ; 
and  when  he  takes  in  the  number  of  families,  the  man- 
ner in  which  they  are  recorded,  the  universal  custom  of 
the  Jewish  nation,  and  all  the  circumstances  connected 
with  these   cases  of  family  baptisms,  recorded  in  the 

-^  C.  Taylor's  Apos.  Bap.  p.  89. 


LAW  OF  ACTION.  227 

Holy  Scriptures,  the  probabilities  multiply  to  an  in- 
finite extent.  Then  to  which  shall  we  give  allegiance — 
to  an  opinion  which  started  up  in  the  dark  ages,  or  to 
the  practice  of  Christians  from  the  beginning  ?  If,  in 
duties  where  demonstration  cannot  be  given,  we  are 
morally  bound  to  take  the  greater  probability,  how  must 
we  act  in  this-  case  ?  Shall  we,  can  we,  lay  aside  the 
ancient  universal  custom  of  the  Church,  the  strongest 
visible  tie  between  Christ  and  our  children,  the  faithful 
constant  monitor  of  our  duty  to  our  little  ones,  and  sub- 
stitute a  conjecture  brooded  and  hatched  when  gloom 
and  ignorance  had  spread  over  the  earth  ?  What  law 
in  morals  or  religion  will  authorize  such  a  course  ?  AYe 
have  seen  that  the  first  generation  after  the  Apostles 
did  beyond  all  doubt  baptize  their  little  children.  We 
have  seen  that  it  has  been  continued  by  the  great  body 
of  Christians  ever  since.  We  have  seen  that  family 
religion,  including  the  young  children  as  well  as  the 
older  ones,  was  the  universal  privilege  of  the  people  of 
God  up  to  the  coming  of  Christ.  Yfe  have  seen  that 
His  great  Commission  to  his  Apostles  does  not  forbid 
this  privilege  under  the  Gospel,  but  rather  is  clothed  in 
such  terms  that  may  not  only  embrace,  but  under  the 
circumstances  absolutely  impose  the  duty  of  receiving, 
the  little  ones  with  their  parents.  And,  with  this 
construction,  his  words  and  deeds  concerning  little  chil- 
dren accord,  the  preaching  of  the  Apostles  correspond,  and 
the  frequent  baptisms  of  whole  families,  and  their  mode 
of  record  all  unite — thus  combining  doctrine,  practice, 
and  incidental  circumstances,  into  one  harmonious  whole. 
And  yet  we  have  been  told  that  we  ought  to  give  up 
this  time-honored,  blessed  priyilege,  and  adopt  the  cold, 


228  LAW  OF  INVESTIGATION. 

calculating,  unfeeling  alternative  of  leaving  our  little 
ones  to  tliG  uncovenanted  mercies  of  God,  till  they  can 
work  for  themselves  !  Although  they  have  never  sinned 
after  the  similitude  of  Adam's  transgression,  yet  they 
must  remain  under  its  bondage,  (visibly  at  least,)  till 
they  can  of  themselves  apply  for  the  Seal  of  the  Cove- 
nant of  their  Redemption ! 

And  to  any  remonstrance  to  the  contrary,  how  often 
are  we  met  with  the  reply,  "  The  burden  of  proof  lies 
upon  you!"  as  though  they  who  set  themselves  up 
against  the  practice  of  the  Christian  world  for  centuries, 
ought  not  to  sustain  their  position  by  something  more 
than  assertion. 

But  the  humble  seeker  after  truth  neither  seeks  nor 
desires  any  advantage  of  that  kind  :  he  wants  the  truth, 
and  only  the  truth ;  and  those  who  know  that  the  Holy 
Scriptures  were  written  after  the  Church  was  founded, 
and  given  to  it  for  its  guide  and  protection — not  as  a 
constitution,  prescribing  its  organization — will  see  that 
the  point  before  us  to  be  settled  is,  whether  family  bap- 
tisms including  little  children,  are  in  accordance  with  its 
teaching — directly  or  indirectly  implied  in  its  holy 
pages.  And  thus  far  we  have  seen  that  the  usage  of  the 
people  of  God  up  to  the  time  of  the  Apostles,  and  the 
teaching  and  practice  of  the  next  generation  in  the 
Church  after  the  Apostles,  both  alike  received  families, 
including  little  children  into  covenant  with  God,  and 
that  the  Apostles  did  also  baptize  whole  families,  with- 
out regard  to  age,  so  far  as  we  can  learn  anything  to 
the  contrary,  and  therefore  were  all  agreed  on  this 
point.  If  any  one  can  show  anything  to  the  contrary, 
let  it  bo  producf'd. 


CHAPTER  VIII. 


TESTIMONY    OF   THE   HOLY    SCRIPTURES    CONCLUDED. 

Laws  of  marriage  among  the  Jews— The  holy  seed  not  allowed  ^o  mingle 
■with  heathen  nations— Such  marriages  dissolved  in  times  of  reformation 
—Heathen  wives  and  children  put  away— Difficulties  suggested  in  regard 
to  "  helieving  and  unhelieving"  husbands  and  wives  under  the  new  dis- 
pensation—Ceremonial law  not  applicable— Positive  influence  from  be- 
liever on  unbeliever  fits  the  latter  for  their  union,  hence  the  children  are 
holy  and  not  unclean— Holy  and  unclean  always  used  in  a  ceremonial 
or  religious  sense — Children  numbered  among  the  holy  and  saints  by 
St.  Paul— Their  parents  instructed  how  to  train  them— St.  John  divides 
the  members  of  the  Church  into  three  classes,  fathers,  young  men  and 
little  children— Summary  of  testimony— Earnest  exhortation  to  the 
faithful  training  of  our  little  ones  for  Christ's  spiritual  kingdom. 

We  come  next  to  a  passage  in  the  first  Epistle  to  the 
Corinthians,  which  shows  how  much  the  Jewish  Chris- 
tians were  under  the  influence  of  early  education,  wdiile 
it  also  proves,  that  the  young  children  of  Christians  are 
qualified  for  church  membership. 

The  Jews,  as  the  people  of  God,  were  called  "  holy," 
a  "holy  people"  unto  the  Lord,  "a  special  people,"  "a 
holy  seed."  (Deut.  vii.  xxvi.  Ezra  xx.)  Just  as  Chris- 
tians are  called  "Saints,"  a  holy  nation,  "peculiar 
people,"  "chosen  generation,"  (Acts  ix.  Titus  ii.  1 
Peter  ii.  &c.)  and  Pagan  nations  were  called  "unclean," 
"  uncircumcised." 

The  Jews  as  a  "  holy  people"  were  forbidden  to  inter- 
20 


230  LAW  OF  MARRIAGE. 

marry  with  Pagan  nations:  "  Neither  shalt  thou  make 
marriages  with  them  ;  thy  daughter  thou  shalt  not  give 
unto  his  son,  nor  his  daughter  shalt  thou  take  unto  thy 
son."  (Deut.  vii.  3.)  And  further  when  such  marriages 
had  been  contracted,  it  was  deemed  essential  to  a  thorough 
reformation  that  they  be  dissolved. 

In  the  time  of  Ezra,  many  had  broken  through  this 
law  and  taken  to  themselves  Pagan  wives.  The  princes 
came  to  Ezra  and  complained  that  the  "holy  seed"  had 
mingled  themselves  with  the  surrounding  nations,  having 
taken  their  daughters  for  themselves,  and  for  their  sons. 
(Ezra  ix.  3.)  This  was  the  cause  of  much  lamentation, 
and  the  people  were  assembled  and  "wept  very  sore." 
(Ezra  X.  2,  3.)  "And  Shechaniah  the  son  of  Jehiel, 
one  of  the  sons  of  Elam,  answered  and  said  unto  Ezra, 
we  have  transgressed  against  our  God,  and  have  taken 
strange  wives  of  the  people  of  the  land :  yet  now  there 
is  hope  in  Israel  concerning  this  thing.  Now  therefore 
let  us  make  a  covenant  with  our  God,  to  put  away  all  the 
wives  and  such  as  are  born  of  them,  according  to  the 
council  of  my  lord,  and  of  those  that  tremble  at  the 
commandment  of  our  God;  and  let  it  be  done  according 
to  the  law."  Ezra  arose  and  made  all  the  people  "  swear 
that  they  would  do  according  to  this  word.  And  they 
sware.  (5th  verse.)  And  accordingly  all  such  marriages 
Avere  then  dissolved. 

Certain  Jewish  believers  at  Corinth,  as  it  appears, 
thought  the  same  law,  or  principle,  ought  to  be  observed 
under  the  new  dispensation.  Eor  when  it  was  found 
that  there  were  some  among  them,  whose  husbands  or 
wives  were  unbelievers,  and  yet  both  continuing  to  dwell 


BELIEVERS  UNITED  TO  UNBELIEVERS.  231 

together  in  wedlock,  the  question  was  raised,  whether 
the  believer  in  such  cases  ought  not  to  separate  from  the 
unbelieving  partner  ?  They  referred  the  matter  to  the 
Apostle  Paul,  who  replied  as  follows : 

1  Cor.  vii.  12-14.  ^'  If  any  brother  hath  a  wife  that 
helieveth  not,  and  if  she  he  pleased  to  divell  with  him, 
let  him  not  j^ut  her  aivay — and  the  ivoman  ivhich  hath 
an  husband  that  believeth  not,  aiid  if  he  be  pleased  to 
divell  with  her,  let  her  not  leave  him.  For  the  unbeliev- 
ing husband  is  sanctified  by  the  ivife,  and  the  unbelieving 
wife  is  sanctified  by  the  husband:  else  luere your  children 
unclean,  but  now  are  they  holy.'' 

This  reply  of  the  Apostle  shows  that  the  believer  is 
not  required,  under  the  Gospel,  which  leans  to  mercy, 
to  separate  from  an  unbelieving  partner ;  and  that 
instead  of  the  believer  being  polluted  by  the  unbeliever, 
the  latter  is  in  a  certain  sense  sanctified  by  the  former, 
in  virtue  of  which  their  children  are  "  holy" — to  be  treat- 
ed as  the  "holy  seed,"  not  as  "unclean"  Pagan  chil- 
dren. Now,  as  the  "holy  seed,"  and  all  persons  called 
"holy"  (aytot)  were  received  into  covenant  with  God,  and 
numbered  with  his  people — and  "unclean"  and  "  uncir- 
cumcised,"  were  terms  used  to  distinguish  those  not  re- 
ceived into  covenant  among  God's  people,  this  passage 
teaches,  that  though  only  one  parent  be  a  believer,  their 
children  are  numbered  among  the  holy  seed,  and  hence 
are  qualified  for  the  Christian  covenant,  therefore  for 
baptism,  because  they  must  be  baptized  to  enter  into 
that  covenant. 

"  Holy"  {ayioi)  is  used  everywhere  in  the  Septuagint 
for  a  Hebrew  word  which  means  "  pure,"   "  clean,"  and 


232  APPLICATION  OF  HOLY. 

is  used  in  the  New  Testament  for  saints  (aytot).  Acts 
ix.  13,  32,  41 ;  xxvi.  10,  &c.  Paul  confessed  that  he 
had  shut  many  of  the  saints,  t-wv  aytwv  (holy  per- 
sons in  prison,)  Kom.  xv.  25.  "  I  go  to  Jerusalem  to 
minister  to  the  saints,  {t^ol^  aytots).  He  also  addresses 
the  churches  on  various  occasions,  calling  the  members 
by  the  same  name  (toosayioLi)  "holy  persons."  To  the 
"holy  persons"  (toi^ aytotj)  at  Ephesus.  To  the  [foiiayioii 
xai  TCKifoi^)  "  holy  persons  (or  saints)  and  to  faithfuls  at 
Colosse."  "  To  all  the  (-z'ots  aytotj)  holy  persons  in  Christ 
Jesus  at  Philippi."  This  title  is  given  in  a  multitude 
of  places  to  the  members  of  the  Church,  and  the  "fact 
is  indisputable  (says  Taylor*)  that  the  appellative  '  holy,' 
is  not  bestowed  in  the  New  Testament  on  any  person 
not  a  member  of  the  Church. 

But  in  the  passage  under  consideration,  it  is  expressly 
applied  to  young  children.  Shall  we  then  receive  it  in 
the  same  sense  in  this  as  in  other  passages,  or  shall  we  give 
it  a  different  meaning  from  all  the  other  places  in  which 
the  sacred  writers  use  it?  " This  appellation  being  never 
given  in  the  Scriptures  (says  Hay)  to  any  but  to  those  who 
are  of  the  Church  and  in  covenant  with  God,  we  must 
understand  it  here  in  the  same  sense  ;  and  therefore,  the 
children  of  one  believing  parent,  and  more  conclusively, 
if  both  be  believers,  are  of  the  Church,  and  entitled  to 
be  admitted  therein  by  baptism,  for  the  children  of  one 
believer,  are  called  'holy,'  in  the  same  sense  as  the 
Israelites  are  called  a  '  holy  people,'  and  the  members 
of  Gospel  Churches  are  called  "  saints"  or  holy  persons, 
"a  holy  nation,"  a   "peculiar   people:" — not  because 

^  "  Apostolic  baptism." 


UNBELIEVER  NOMINALLY  SANCTIFIED.  233 

they  are  all  truly  pious  and  sanctified,  but  because  tbey 
are  visibly  the  people  of  God,  and  have  been  received 
into  his  covenant."*  Now  as  the  question  proposed  to 
the  Apostle,  must  have  originated  in  Jewish  scruples,  so 
the  reasoning  on  his  answer  is  exactly  adapted  to  the 
nature  of  such  an  origin.  If  the  believer  must  put 
away  an  unbelieving  partner,  he  must,  according  to  the 
same  law  and  practice,  put  away  the  children  of  such  a 
marriage  likewise:  for  those  "born  of  them"  are  un- 
clean by  the  same  authority,  and  must  be  excluded 
from  the  community  of  God's  people  and  covenanted 
privileges.  But  the  unbelieving  partner,  in  consequence 
of  his  union  by  marriage  before  the  other  believed,  is 
sanctified  by  her  faith  for  the  relation  of  husband,  and 
hence  their  children  must  not  be  treated  as  "unclean" 
pagan  children,  but  as  "the  holy  seed." 

The  whole  argument  seems  to  be  this.  To  the  ques- 
tion asked,  (as  we  may  suppose  by  Jewish  believers,) 
"  ought  not  a  believer  to  separate  from  an  unbelieving 
partner,  and  their  marriage  be  dissolved?"  The  Apostle 
replies — No.  If  the  unbeliever  be  pleased  to  continue 
with  the  believer,  let  them  continue  together,  "  for  the 
unbeliever  is  sanctified  by  the  believer,"  i.  e.,  both  being 
"  one  fleshf  by  lawful  marriage  before  the  conversion  of 


*  Hay  on  Baptism. 

f  There  is  a  difference  between  the  marriages  here  alluded  to,  and 
those  formed  by  the  Jews  with  Pagan  nations.  The  marriage  of  a 
Jew  with  a  Pagan,  was  contrary  to  law  in  the  first  instance,  but  a 
marriage  between  two  heathens  was  according  to  law,  and  both  con- 
sequently regarded  as  one  flesh.  The  conversion  of  one  afterwards 
may  be  supposed  to  pass  an  influence  on  the  other,  or  at  least  entitle 
him  to  such  privileges  as  their  connection  would  justify.  These  pri- 
vileges or  benefits,  so  far  affect  his  heathen  state  of  uncleanness,  that 

20* 


234  UNCLEANNESS  NOT  ILLEGITIMACY. 

the  believer,  the  unbeliever  in  virtue  of  this  connection, 
is  so  far  benefited  by  the  believer,  or  so  far  entitled  to 
the  privileges  of  the  sanctified  ones,  that  he  must  not  be 
treated  as  unclean,  but  as  nominally  sanctified — else  were 
the  children  unclean ;  but  now  are  they  holy,  for  if  the 
tree  be  holy  so  are  the  branches  in  a  ceremonial  sense." 

"If,"  says  Dr.  Whitby,  '^  t\\Q  lioly  seed  among  the 
Jews  were  circumcised  and  made  federally  holy,  by 
receiving  the  sign  of  the  covenant,  and  being  admitted 
into  the  number  of  God's  people,  because  they  were 
born  seminally  holy — then  by  like  reason  the  holy  seed 
of  Christians  ought  to  be  admitted  to  baptism,  the  sign 
of  the  Christian  covenant,  and  so  be  entered  into  the 
society  of  the  Christian  Church." 

Seeing  that  this  interpretation  must  admit  Infant 
baptism,  some  of  its  opposers  have  given  the  passage  a 
difi"erent  rendering  ;  in  doing  which,  they  are  compelled 
to  change  the  meaning  of  the  words  "holy"  (ayta)  and 
"unclean"  (axa^apra)  from  that  generally  received  to 
one  no  where  else  given  to  them  in  the  Holy  Scriptures  ! 
They  render  the  passage  in  substance  as  follows:  "For 
the  unbelieving  partner  is  sanctified  by  the  believer, 
else  were  your  children  illegitimate,  but  now  are  they 
legitimate."  Neither  logic  nor  philology  will  admit  of 
this  interpretation.  For  if  the  question  be  one  of  a 
legal  character  only,  in  what  sense  can  the  believer  add 
to  or  take  from  the  lawfulness  of  the  marriage,  so  as  to 
make  the  children  legitimate  ?    The  children  of  heathen 


he  must  not  be  regarded  in  the  same  light  with  a  heathen,  but  as  one 
in  a  certain  sense  sanctified  in  consequence  of  the  union  pre-existing 
between  the  pair. 


HOLY  AND  UNCLEAN  NOT  LEGAL  TERMS.     235 

parents  are  certainly  as  legitimate  in  the  eye  of  the  law 
as  they  would  be  though  one  were  a  believer.  And  yet, 
according  to  the  passage,  were  it  not  for  some  favorable 
influence  of  the  believer,  the  children  would  be  "un- 
clean." This  uncleanncss  cannot,  therefore,  be  illegiti- 
macy, because  it  depends  on  that  which  cannot  affect 
the  legality  of  the  marriage. 

But  could  the  reasoning  of  the  Apostle  be  reconciled 
to  this  interpretation,  the  meaning  of  the  words  aza^apra 
(unclean)  and  ayta  (holy)  cannot.  For  notwithstanding 
the  very  frequent  use  of  these  terms  in  the  Sacred 
Scriptures,  there  is  not  one  single  place  in  which  they 
are  used  in  such  a  sense.  Besides  there  are  specific 
words  in  the  Greek  language  for  "  legitimate  and  ille- 
gitimate," which  rendered  it  necessary  for  the  Apostle  to 
use  them  in  such  a  sense.  Had  he  meant  "  illegitimate," 
he  would,  beyond  a  doubt,  have  used  the  same  word 
ro^os  (bastard)  which  he  uses  in  his  Epistle  to  the  He- 
brews, (chap.  xii.  8.)  And  had  he  meant  "legitimate," 
there  was  also  its  proper  word  yvr^ito^-  But  referring  to 
the  Gentile  and  Christian  state,  as  the  whole  argument 
goes  to  show,  he  used  in  their  natural  sense,  the  proper 
w^ords  to  convey  what  he  meant — axa^apra  (unclean)  and 
ayta  (holy.)  Instead  of  requiring  these  terms  to  be 
changed  from  their  natural  and  proper  sense,  both  the 
nature  of  the  question  and  the  character  of  the  argu- 
ment require  them  to  be  received  in  the  same  sense 
here,  in  which  they  are  received  in  all  other  places  in 
the  Sacred  Scriptures,  and  hence  to  receive  into  the 
fold  of  Christ  all  to  whom  the  appelhition  "holy"  is 
therein  applied,  though  but  one  of  the  parents  of  such 
children  be  a  believer. 


236  CHILDREN  OF  CHRISTIANS  HOLY  SEED. 

2.  Others,  wlio  are  opposed  to  Infant  baptism,  but 
not  willing  to  adopt  an  interpretation  that  changes 
words  so  entirely  from  their  usual  meaning  as  to  render 
'' holy  and  unclean"  by  "  legitimate  and  illegitimate," 
would  refer  the  reasoning  of  the  Apostle  to  the  relation 
existing  between  all  Christian  parents  and  their  chil- 
dren— i.  e.  the  unbeliever  is  sanctified  by  the  believer, 
else  were  the  children  of  all  Christian  parents  unclean 
to  them  and  must  be  put  away  from  them. 

This  interpretation  is  inconsistent  in  itself,  for  it 
opposes  the  idea  that  "holy  and  unclean"  are  used  in 
a  legal  sense,  and  adopts  that  of  a  religious  one,  yet 
changes  the  religious  sense  of  the  terms  employed,  in 
their  general  application  to  the  children  of  all  Chris- 
tians. The  argument  is  evidently  confined  to  the  case 
of  an  unbeliever  living  in  wedlock  with  a  believer,  and 
the  disadvantages  that  would  accrue  to  the  children, 
by  a  separation  of  such  parents  from  each  other.  Now 
the  argument  being  Jewish,  the  terms  used  must  of 
course  be  of  the  same  character — i.  e.  according  to 
their  general  acceptation  among  that  people  on  such 
questions ;  and  how  could  the  Apostle  expect  to  be 
understood,  unless  he  used  language  as  it  was  generally 
understood  by  those  to  whom  he  addressed  himself? 
And  if  he  does  thus  use  it,  what  was  understood  by  the 
term  "holy"  when  applied  to  children  or  to  persons 
among  the  Jews  ?  What  did  they  mean  when  the  com- 
plaint was  made,  that  the  "holy  seed"  had  mingled 
itself  with  surrounding  nations  ?  And  what  law  was 
that  which  was  violated  thereby,  and  which  some  of  the 
judaizing   Christians    in   Corinth  thought  ought  to  be 


USUAL  ACCEPTATION  OF  TERMS.         237 

applied  to  the  case  that  the  Apostle  was  considering  ? 
And  in  that  law,  how  are  the  terms  "unclean"  and 
"holy,"  used?  There  is  but  one  answer — all  persons, 
of  whatever  age,  called  "holy,"  belonged  to  the  visible 
community  of  God's  people — were  members  of  his 
visible  Church.  How  then,  could  they  imagine  the 
Apostle  to  mean  any  thing  else,  than  that  these  children 
were  to  be  regarded  as  all  others,  upon  whom  this  appel- 
lation had  been  bestowed  ?  His  reasoning  is  just  such 
as  we  might  expect  one  Christian  Jew  to  use  with 
another,  under  such  circumstances  —  employing  lan- 
guage familiar  to  both.  And  we  are,  therefore,  bound 
to  give  these  terms  their  usual  acceptation,  and  to 
regard  the  children  to  whom  they  are  applied,  as  num- 
bered with  the  people  of  God,  and  hence  entitled  to 
baptism. 

It  is  a  common  thing  to  change  the  address  from  the 
third  to  the  second  person,  several  instances  of  the 
kind  are  to  be  found  in  the  same  chapter  to  which  these 
words  belong — but  the  use  of  "  holy"  in  any  other  than 
a  religious  sense,  is  unknown  in  the  Holy  Scriptures. 
Neither  such  a  perversion  of  the  first  principles  of 
reasoning,  as  that,  because  religious  parents  are  per- 
mitted to  live  with  their  little  children,  therefore  it 
follows,  believing  and  unbelieving  husbands  and  wives 
may  live  together  if  they  choose.  Nor  that  if  you 
dissolve  such  marriages  then  you  must  dissolve  the 
connection  between  parents  and  children.  By  thus 
reversing  the  propositions  you  see  there  is  no  necessary 
connection  between  the  premises  and  conclusions,  the 
analogy  fails,  and  such  logic  could  satisfy  no  inquiring 


238  INFLUENCE  FROM  THE  BELIEVER. 

mind.  It  comes  in  direct  conflict  with  the  very  prin- 
ciple that  gave  rise  to  the  scruple ;  whichj  in  order  to 
protect  the  families  and  rising  generation  of  the  people 
of  God,  from  the  corrupting  influences  of  surrounding 
nations,  forbade  marriages  vv'ith  them,  and  made  it  a  con- 
dition where  such  marriages  had  been  contracted,  that 
the  partner  and  children  must  be  abandoned  before  such 
an  one  could  be  received  back  among  the  holy  seed. 

But  if  Christian  parents  must  all  be  separated  from 
their  children,  if  you  separate  believing  and  infidel 
husbands  and  wives,  according  to  Dr.  Dagg's  new 
theory,  then  the  very  end  for  which  such  a  law  was 
enacted  is  perverted  ;  and  the  influence  of  pious  parents 
and  their  inculcation  of  the  true  religion  among  their 
children,  lost.  Whereas  the  inference  drawn  by  the 
Apostle  evidently  is — if  you  put  away  unbelieving  hus- 
bands or  wives,  according  to  the  law  referred  to,  you 
must  put  away  their  children  also — for  on  the  same 
principle  would  they  also  be  "  unclean.''  But  under 
the  Gospel  it  is  different.  Those  marriages  were  lawful 
in  the  first  place,  and  the  man  and  wife  being  one  in  a 
certain  sense,  the  act  of  the  believer  after  their  mar- 
riage, redounds  in  part  to  the  benefit  of  the  other,  and 
entitles  him  to  the  privilege  of  remaining  among  the 
people  of  God  if  he  chooses.  "  For  the  unbelieving  hus- 
band is  sanctified  hy  the  wife^  a7id  the  unbelieving  wife 
is  sanctified  by  the  husband ;  else  luere  your  children 
unclean^  but  noiv  are  they  holy.'' 

It  is  strange  that  such  a  man  as  the  Bev.  Albert 
Barnes  could  not  see  that  it  was  by  or  through  the 
believing  partner  that  a  supposed  religious  disability  was 


LITTLE  CHILDREN  CALLED  SAINTS.  239 

removed,  and  not  the  infidel  state  of  the  parent  or  sepa- 
tion  that  would  make  the  children  civilly  illegitimate^ 
which  would  be  a  non  sequiter  in  theory  as  it  is  in  fact. 
His  own  references  show  that  the  term  ''unclean"  is 
used  in  a  religious  and  not  in  a  mere  civil  sense.  And 
the  only  rendering  of  the  passage  that  harmonizes  the 
scope  of  the  argument^  and  the  natural  use  of  the  terms 
with  a  logical  conclusion^  is  that  which  shows  that  the 
law  against  certain  marriages  in  a  former  dispensation, 
did  not  apply  in  this  case,  and  that  the  believing  and 
unbelieving  partner  may  continue  together,  and  their 
children  be  treated  as  "holy" — numbered  among  God's 
people — and  baptized. 

And  this  rendering  is  confirmed  by  the  fact  that  the 
same  Apostle  addresses  children  as  "  saints "  and 
"  hol3%"  in  other  places,  and  recognizes  them  as  be- 
longing to  the  Church  with  their  parents.  In  his 
Epistles  to  the  Church  at  Ephesus  and  at  Colosse  he 
enumerates  under  the  title  of  "  saints"  (aytot)  and 
"faithful"  {riiGtoL)  husbands,  wives,  masters,  parents 
and  children — evidently  intending  to  include  the  whole 
of  Christian  families. 

To  the  Church  of  Ephesus  he  writes  : 

Ephesians  i.  1.  "  Paul  an  Apostle  of  Jesus  Christ 
by  the  will  of  God,  to  the  saints  which  are  at  Ephesus 
and  to  the  faithful  in  Christ  Jesus."  Now  mark,  that 
this  Epistle  is  written  to  the  Church — to  the  "  saints 
and  faithful,"  or  members  of  a  Christian  body  at  Ephe- 
sus. It  reads  in  chapter  vi.  1,  2,  3,  4,  "  Children,  obey 
your  parents  in  the  Lord,  for  this  is  right.  Honor  thy 
father  and  mother,  (which  is  the  first  commandment 


240       SUITED  TO  VERY  YOUNG  CHILDREN. 

Tfith  promise,)  that  it  may  be  well  with  thee,  and  that 
thou  mayest  live  long  on  the  earth.  And  ye  fathers, 
provoke  not  your  children  to  wrath  :  but  bring  them 
up  in  the  nurture  and  admonition  of  the  Lord." 

Here  are  children  included  among  the  members  of  a 
Church,  who  are  so  young  that  they  require  the  pious 
training  and  guidance  of  their  parents  in  the  duties  of 
religion.  Their  parents  are  instructed  how  to  bring 
them  up.  Not  to  be  so  rigid  and  severe  as  to  provoke 
and  develop  feelings  of  anger  and  crossness  in  their 
offspring,  but  to  pursue  a  kind  and  gentle  course  of 
discipline ;  to  exercise  the  authority  and  temper  of 
Christian  principles  towards  them ;  "to  bring  them  up 
in  the  nurture  and  admonition  of  the  Lord."  And  thus 
they  would  enable  them  to  fulfill  the  expectations  of 
the  Church,  and  prove  themselves  worthy  of  their  high 
calling  and  name.  That  such  is  the  meaning  of  the 
Apostle  is  clear  from  the  general  scope  of  the  Epistle. 
After  explaining  certain  doctrines,  he  then  gives  some 
advice  and  admonition  of  a  practical  character.  And 
for  this  end  he  specifies  the  duties  that  are  peculiar  to 
every  branch  of  a  Christian  family.  He  points  out  the 
corresponding  duties  of  husbands  and  wives,  of  masters 
and  servants,  and  of  parents  and  children  ;  all  of  whom 
are  classed  among  the  saints,  and  the  motives  held  forth 
to  influence  their  conduct,  such  only  as  was  of  authority 
among  Christians. 

That  the  Apostle  did  not  intend  to  confine  himself  to 
only  those  children  who  were  verging  into  manhood  and 
womanhood,  and  were  capable  of  making  a  creditable 
profession  for  themselves,  is  obvious  from  the  fact  that 


FxVMILY  RELIGION.  241 

his  words  apply  more  especially  to  young  children,  than 
to  those  farther  advanced.  To  such  as  yet  needed  to 
be  trained  "in  the  nurture  and  admonition  of  the  Lord." 
This  would  be  no  longer  necessary  to  one  capable  of 
such  a  profession  by  his  own  responsible  agency.  For 
the  time  for  such  training  and  parental  discipline  with 
such  an  one  would  be  passed. 

Besides,  who  can  suppose  that  one  guided  by  the 
principles  of  Him  who  sa  loved  little  children  that  he 
was  offended  with  others  for  attempting  to  keep  them 
away  from  him — would  write  for  the  benefit  of  every 
other  member  of  a  household,  and  pass  over  the  little 
children  in  silence  !  Not  say  a  siagle  word — or  inti- 
mate that  the  parent  was  bound  in  Christian  love  to  his 
dependent  little  ones,  who  had  souls  that  needed  train- 
ing, and  parental  supervision,  and  heavenly  instruction 
as  much  as  the  older  children  who  had  grown  up  and 
were  able  to  choose  for  themselves !  What,  think  it 
important  that  the  corresponding  duties  of  husband  and 
wife,  master  and  servant,  parent  and  older  children 
should  be  attended  to ;  but  the  younger  children  whose 
tender  minds  are  so  susceptible  of  good  impressions,  and 
on  whose  early  training  so  much  depends,  not  worthy 
of  mention,  and  passed  over  as  farming  no  portion  of 
that  race  for  whom  the  Saviour  died  !  believe  it  who 
can.  No — the  Apostle  had  more  of  his  Master's  spirit, 
than  to  go  into  a  Christian  family  and  give  directions 
for  the  benefit  of  every  one  in  it,  -and  not  think  of  the 
''  little  ones" — not  even  give  them  a  kind  look,  for  that 
would  have  called  forth  some  remark  concerning  them. 
He  acted  far  otherwise — he  included  all  the  children, 
21 


242  ALL  THE  EAMILY  FAITHFULS. 

and  especially  the  younger  ones  that  still  needed  the 
watchful  care  and  kind  instruction  of  their  parents,  and 
he  instructed  their  parents  to  train  them  in  the  disci- 
pline and  doctrine  of  Christ  and  his  religion  ;  as  all 
little  children  should  be  trained. 

And  he  calls  them  all  '-faithfuls" — members  of  the 
Christian  Church.  And  commanded  that  they  be  in- 
structed as  Christians — that  they  be  governed  and 
guided  with  the  kindness  and  tenderness  in  the  doc- 
trines of  the  Gospel  of  Christ — not  treated  with  harsh- 
ness, or  ruled  with  a  tyranny  that  would  provoke  and 
discourage  them.  To  the  same  effect  he  wrote  also  to 
the  Church  at  Colosse. 

CoLossiANS  I.  1,  2. — ^'Paul,  an  Apostle  of  Jesus 
CluHst  hy  the  ivill  of  God,  and  Timotlieus  our  brother, 
to  the  saints  ayid  faithful  brethren  iii  Christ  ivhich  are 
at  Colosse.''' 

Chapter  hi.  20,  21. — "  Children,  obey  your  piarcnts 
in  all  things :  for  this  is  well-])leasi7ig  unto  the  Lord. 
Fatliers,  frovol^e  not  your  children  to  anger,  lest  they  be 
discouraged.'' 

The  same  principles  are  inculcated  in  regard  to 
children  in  this  Epistle,  that  were  inculcated  in  that 
sent  to  the  Church  at  Ephesus.  Children  are  address- 
ed and  recognized  as  members  of  the  Church,  and 
duties  are  laid  down  for  their  observance,  and  that  of 
their  parents.  They  must  be  trained  with  the  same 
care  and  faithfulness  as  the  children  of  the  Ephesian 
Christians.  And  the  admonition  addressed  to  them, 
and  penned  for  all,  as  soon  as  capable  of  understanding 
it,  that  the  highest  Authority  requires  them  to  obey 


INSTRUCTION  OF  THE  SIMPLEST  KIND.  i^4o 

and  honor  their  father  and  mother.  Such  instruction 
gave  more  importance  and  authority  to  the  teaching  of 
their  parents,  and  hence  aided  them  in  their  work  of 
training.  But  only  the  simplest  form  of  truth  is  written 
to  the  children — not  things  difficult  to  understand — not 
such  doctrines  as  require  children  to  be  grown  up  nearly 
to  manhood  to  comprehend.  On  the  contrary,  they  are 
among  the  most  simple  and  easy  duties  that  can  be 
taught  the  infant  mind  ;  because  they  express  the  na- 
tural feelings  of  an  innocent  age.  The  duty  to  obey  its 
mother  is  among  the  first  things  that  a  child  learns.  To 
love  and  honor  father  and  mother  is  a  lesson  soon  felt 
and  understood.  So  that  the  children  addressed,  are 
called  upon  to  attend  to  the  first,  or  what  ought  to  be 
the  first  duties,  that  are  taught  them. 

The  object  the  Apostle  had  in  view,  was  doubtless 
the  due  observance  of  the  duties  arising  from  the  corre- 
sponding relations  of  the  different  members  of  a  Chris- 
tian household — and  the  great  end  of  making  all  the 
children,  young  and  old,  Christians  in  heart  as  well  as 
in  name.  All  of  them  should  be  trained  in  the  way 
that  will  promote  that  end,  and  therefore  much  care 
and  caution  ought  to  be  exercised,  lest  they  be  dis- 
couraged by  a  want  of  prudence  on  the  part  of  those  to 
whom  this  great  work  is  committed. 

And  as  these  Epistles  were  written  to  members  of  the 
Church,  enforcing  duties,  on  only  Christian  principles — 
because  "well-pleasing  unto  the  Lord" — little  children 
included ;  the  membership  of  little  children  is  therefore 
recognized  by  St.  Paul. 

In  conformity  to  the  custom  of  the  sacred  writers  in 


'2.44:  SEPULCHRAL  INSCRIPTIONS. 

applying  the  terms  "saints"  and  "faithfuls"  to  chil- 
dren without  regard  to  age,  and  as  confirmation  of  the 
above  interpretation,  we  find  from  the  sepulchral  in- 
scriptions of  the  early  Christians  that  they  applied  the 
same  terms  to  those  who  belonged  to  the  Christian 
Church,  whateyer  might  be  their  age.  We  select  a  few 
of  the  many  that  are  still  preserved."^ 

"  A  '  FAITHFUL,'  descended  from  ancestors  who  were  '  faith- 
fuls/ here  lies  Zosimus  :  he  lived  two  years,  one  month,  and 
twenty-five  days/' 

The  symbol  of  a  fish  and  anchor  accompanies  this  in- 
scription, which  marks  the  age  to  which  it  belonged. 
The  fish  and  anchor  as  symbols,  were  in  general  us'e 
among  the  Christians  in  the  second  century,  and  early 
part  of  the  third,  and  is  approved  by  Clemens  Alexan- 
drinus,  who  vfrote  about  ninety  years  from  the  Apos- 
tolic age. 

This  child  was  a  "faithful,"  i.  e.  a  Church-member  at 
two  years  of  age.  Descended  from  parents  who  were 
"faithfuls,"  and  wdio  caused  him  to  be  baptized  in  in- 
fancy, which  shows  how  they  understood  the  Apostolic 
injunction.     Again — 

"  Posthumius  Euthenion,  a  faithful  Christian  brother,  acxjom- 
panied  with  the  Holy  Grace.  On  the  day  before  his  sixth  birth- 
day, early,  he  gave  back  that  which  he  had  received — his  life. 
He  lived  six  years,  and  was  buried  the  fifth  of  the  ides  of  July  on  a 
Thursday,  on  which  day  he  was  born  :  whose  soul  is  with  the  Holy 
One  in  peace.  Erected  to  a  well-deserving  son,  Posthumius,  by 
order  of  his  grandmother  Euthenla  Fytista." 

"^  Taken  from  Taylor's  Facts  and  Kvidenees. 


INSCRIPTIONS  OF  PKIMITIVE  CHRISTIANS.  245 

This  has  the  word  IX0T2 — a  "fish"  at  the  top,  and 
forming  an  acrostic  down  the  side,  which  was  a  private 
mark  of  Christian  sepulchres,  to  pi*€serve  them  from  vio- 
lation by  the  rude  hands  of  the  heathen  in  primitive 
times.  He  is  called  a  "faithful  Christian  brother,"  yet 
died  before  he  was  six  years  old. 

"  Cyriacus,  a  '  faithful/  died  aged  aged  eight  days  less  than 
three  years.'' 

"  Eustafia,  the  mother  places  this  in  commemoration  of  her  son 
Polichronis,  a  faithful,  who  lived  three  years." 

"To  Pisentus,  an  innocent  soul,  who  lived  one  year,  eight 
months,  and  thirteen  days.  Newly  baptized,  buried  on  the  ides 
of  September,  in  peace." 

"  Achillia,  newly  baptized,  is  buried  here,  she  died  at  the  age 
of  one  year  and  five  months." 

The  figure  of  a  dove  accompanies  this  last  inscription, 
which  was  also  a  symbol  of  the  second  century,  and  de- 
rived, says  Taylor,  from  an  earlier  period.  She,  though 
only  one  year  and  five  months  old,  was  baptized. 

We  might  adduce  many  others  of  the  same  kind,  all 
preserved  as  belonging  to  the  primitive  and  persecuting 
days  of  Christianity,  illustrating  and  testifying  to  the 
truth,  that  the  iVpostles  and  their  first  successors 
baptized  the  young  children  of  Christians.  And  that 
the  terms  "  holy  and  faithful,"  which  are  applied  in  the 
Holy  Scriptures  to  children  w^ithout  regard  to  age,  were 
continued  to  be  used  in  the  same  way  for  several  centu- 
ries, and  that  church-membership  and  family  baptisms 
were  never  limited  by  age  in  the  primitive  Church. 

The  same  use  of  the  term  "faithful"  applied  to  the 
directions  of  St.  Paul  to  Titus  respecting  the  qualifica- 

21* 


246  QUALIFICATIONS  NEEDFUL  TO  BISHOPS. 

tions  of  a  bishop,  would  give  them  an  easy,  natural  in- 
terpretation that  would  harmonize  also  with  similar 
directions  to  Timothy,  and  with  what  has  been  the  prac- 
tice of  Christians  in  every  age  of  the  Church. 

Titus  i.  6,  7. — "If  any  be  blameless,  the  husband  of 
one  wife,  having  faithful  children^  not  accused  of  riot, 
not  unruly.  For  a  bishop  must  be  blameless  as  the 
steward  of  God,"  &c. 

Now  the  phrase  ^'•faitlifid  cliildren^'  in  the  language 
of  the  Holy  Scriptures,  literally  means  "  believing  chil- 
dren." And  if  it  be  a  necessanj  qualificatmi  for  the 
office  of  stewards  and  bishops  of  the  Church  that  their 
children  be  believers,  in  what  sense  must  they  be  so  ? 
The  parent  cannot  be  held  directly  responsible  for  the 
conversion  of  his  children,  nor  even  for  the  morality  of 
those  who  are  grown  up.  And  if  such  be  the  condition 
on  which  offices  in  the  Church  are  to  be  filled,  how  many 
now,  would  have  to  lay  aside  their  authority  and  enter 
into  a  more  humble  sphere !  And  what  branch  of  the 
Church  has  ever  acted  on  the  principle  ? 

But  if  the  Apostle  meant  that  the  children  of  such 
had  been  numbered  among  the  "faithful"  by  baptism 
and  Christian  nurture,  and  kept  in  proper  subjection  and 
not  allowed  to  run  riot  and  grow  up  as  heathen  children, 
then  there  would  be  a  propriety  in  selecting  such  an  one 
as  fitted  to  rule  the  Church.  The  term  "faithful"  would 
be  applied  in  its  usual  Scriptural  sense,  and  the  fitness 
of  the  individual  inferred  from  his  own  acts,  not  from 
that  which  was  beyond  his  control. 

And  this  accords  perfectly  with  what  was  written  to 
Timothy  on  the  same  subject : 


A  FAITHFUL  FATHEK.  247 

1  Timothy  iii.  4,  5. — "  One  that  ruleth  well  his  own 
house,  having  his  children  in  subjection  with  all  gravity: 
(For  if  a  man  know  not  how  to  rule  his  own  house,  how 
shall  he  take,  care  of  the  Church  of  God.)"  To  "rule 
well  one's  own  house  having  his  children  in  subjection 
with  all  gravity,"  is  just  what  every  Christian  should 
do,  and  especially  those  who  undertake  to  rule  or  take 
care  of  the  Church.  And  to  do  this  they  must  "  bring 
up  their  children  in  the  nurture  and  admonition  of  the 
Lord,"  which  is  indeed  only  another  form  of  words  to 
convey  the  same  ideas.  Where  polygamy  had  been  in- 
dulged in  before  their  conversion  to  Christianity,  and 
the  children  of  such  marriages  were  in  part  or  in  whole, 
in  the  hands  of  heathen  mothers,  or  on  account  of  other 
reasons  the  children  were  neglected  and  their  religious 
training  not  attended  to  by  the  parent,  such  an  one  was 
unfitted  for  a  ruler  of  the  Church,  both  as  an  exemplar 
and  guide  to  the  flock.  Not  so  with  him  who  had  one 
wife  and  a  Christian  family  all  living  in  harmony  to- 
gether, governed  by  Christian  doctrine.  He  was  worthy 
of  his  position  as  a  husband  and  father,  showed  good 
fidelity  as  a  Christian,  did  what  he  could  for  the  salva- 
tion of  his  children,  ruled  well  his  own  house,  and  hence 
so  far,  his  faithfulness  was  a  guaranty  and  pledge  that 
he  would  rule  well  the  Church.  And  although  some  of 
his  children  when  grown  up  might  not  prove  to  be  "faith- 
fuls" worthy  of  such  a  father  ;  yet  in  that  family  one 
might  look  for  some  of  each  class  of  such  persons,  as  St. 
John  addresses  in  his  General  Epistle. 

1  John,  12,  13.  "  I  write  unto  you  little  children, 
because  your  sins  are  forgiven  you  for  his  name's  sake. 


248  NATURAL  DIVISION  OF  CHURCH  MEMBERS. 

I  write  unto  you  fathers,  because  ye  have  known  him 
that  is  from  the  beginning.  I  write  unto  you  young 
men,  because  ye  have  overcome  the  wicked  one." 

This  is  a  general  epistle  written  for  all  Christians,  and 
although  "little  children,"  is  a  phrase  sometimes  used 
in  a  metaphorical  sense  by  this  Apostle,  and  in  different 
senses  in  this  same  Epistle,  yet  v/hen  he  divides  Christians 
into  such  natural  divisions,  as  fathers,  young  men,  and 
little  children,  we  can  see  no  reason  for  supposing  they 
are  metaphorical  divisions.  "T  ivrite  unto  you  little 
cJiilch^en,  because  your  sins  are  forgiven  you  for  his 
name's  sake.''  '^  If  it  be  asked,  when  were  their  sins 
forgiven  them?"  The  Ancient  Church  replies,  "I 
acknowledge  one  baptism  for  the  remission  of  sins," 
and  the  Ancient  Church  was  right,  says  Taylor. 
Theselittle  children  were  admitted  into  the  Church  by 
baptism,  administered  for  the  remission  of  sins,"*  (Mark 
i.  4 ;  Luke  iii.  3  ;  Acts  ii.  38.) 

And  if  the  attentive  reader  will  interpret  the  Holy 
Scriptures  in  a  natural  way,  according  to  the  scope  of 
the  writer,  in  those  passages  that  refer  to  little  children, 
families  and  the  subjects  of  baptism  generally,  he  will 
find  infant  membership  and  family  religion  particularly 
pointed  to,  or  more  indistinctly  implied,  and  takeyi  for 
granted  throughout.  But  if  he  chooses  to  make  excep- 
tions of  such  passages,  and  seeks  to  evade  such  meaning, 
and  closes  his  ears  against  every  other  kind  of  evidence, 
then  nothing  but  an  absolute  specific  command  or  ex- 
ample will  be  received  as  authority — and  he  thereby  will 
set  himself  up   as  a  teacher  to  the    Holy  Spirit,  and 

■■^  See  Taylor  on  Apostolic  Baptism. 


CIRCUMCISION  IN  THE  (lOSPEL  CHURCH.  249 

prescribe  to  Him  the  manner  in  Tvliicli  He  should  conr- 
municate  the  will  of  Heaven,  and  the  only  conditions 
on  which  he  will  receive  and  obey  his  instructions ! 

But  such  as  are  willing  to  be  taught  in  God's  way, 
who  are  ready  to  receive  the  truth  in  any  mode  that  He 
may  choose  to  convey  it,  and  are  ready  to  use  all  neces- 
sary means  to  know  the  truth,  we  invite  to  a  liberal  and 
impartial  examination  of  the  passages  to  which  we  have 
referred,  with  the  light  now  afforded  them.  And  why 
should  we  desire  any  thing  beyond  the  will  of  God  in  this 
matter  ?  If  we  wish  to  exclude  little  children,  after 
they  have  been  received  for  two  thousand  years  by 
express  law,  into  covenant  with  God,  why  not  seek  for 
some  positive  precept  or  enactment  by  which  that  law 
has  been  repealed,  and  their  former  privileges  not 
allowed  under  the  New  Dispensation  ?  And  if  this  you 
can  not  find,  why  attempt  to  limit  the  application  of 
passages  to  prove  in  a  negative  way,  that  they  do  not 
necessarily  imply  that  their  former  privileges  are  to  be 
continued,  and  therefore  they  shall  not  be  continued  ? 

The  first  Christians  did  not  understand  the  Apostles 
to  teach  that  their  young  children  must  no  longer  be 
included  in  covenanted  privileges  with  the  chosen  of 
God ;  for,  as  already  noticed,  they  continued  to  circum- 
cise them  as  they  had  done  before  they  embraced  the 
gospel,  and  under  the  belief,  too,  (at  least  many^  if  not 
all^)  that  it  was  necessary  to  the  new  Church  state. 
For  Avhen  the  gospel  was  embraced  by  the  Gentiles, 
"certain  Jewish  teachers"  insisted  that  circumcision 
must  be  observed  by  them  also  as  the  indispensable 
duty  of  Christians.  "  Except  ye  be  circumcised  after 
the  paanner  of  Moses,  ye  cannot  be  saved,"    Acts  xv.  1, 


250  PRACTICE  OF  FIRST  CHRISTIANS. 

Now  liow  could  these  men  continue  a  religious  rite 
among  their  little  children,  which  rite  they  now  supposed 
belonged  to  the  Christian  Church,  and  binding  on 
every  member  in  it,  if  baptism  had  ever  been  denied 
to  their  children,  or  they  been  taught  that  young 
children  were  no  longer  entitled  to  Churclvmember- 
ship  ?  And  if  they  believed  that  they  were  still  entitled 
to  membership,  can  any  one  suppose  that  they  would 
attend  to  a  part  of  the  Church  order  towards  making 
them  members  of  it,  and  omit  the  remaining  part — 
baptism  ? 

Let  us  place  this  properly  before  us.  The  gospel 
was  first  preached  to  the  Jews,  and  confined  to  them 
exclusively,  (Acts  x.  xi,  xiv.)  until  after  it  had  been 
proclaimed  and  spread  throughout  the  Jews'  territory. 
Canaan,  Judea,  Samaria,  and  Galilee  had  all  heard  its 
joyful  sound,  and  thousands  hearkened  and  believed. 
The  Churches  for  some  years,  therefore,  were  composed 
exclusively  of  Jewish  believers.  They  believed  Jesus 
to  be  the  true  Messiah,  and  received  him  as  the  prom- 
ised Saviour  of  the  world.  And  they  entered  into  the 
Christian  covenant  by  baptism ;  but  what  became  of 
their  young  children  who  were  with  them  under  the  old 
covenant  ?  Did  they  leave  them  behind  ?  Or  did  they 
bring  them  with  themselves  into  the  Christian  covenant? 
Is  anything  written,  as  said  or  done,  that  would  lead 
them  to  suppose  that  their  young  children  were  no 
longer  to  be  regarded  as  having  any  connection  with 
the  Church?  Nothing  is  recorded  to  that  efiect:  on 
the  contrary,  they  continued  to  circumcise  them  as  they 
had  always  done,  which  shows  they  still  regarded  them 
as  entitled   to    Church-membership ;    for   they  regarded 


FIRST  COUNCIL  01^  THE  CHURCH.  251 

the  Christian  Church  as  a  continuation  or  enhargement 
of  their  former  Church,  and  Christian  rites  as  additional 
ceremonies  in  this  more  enlarged  and  perfect  state. 
Under  this  belief  must  they  not  have  baptized  all  who 
were  uncircumcised,  unless  prohibited  by  the  Apostles? 
And  if  prohibited  from  baptism,  why  is  nothing  said  about 
it,  and  yet  so  much  contention  about  circumcision  ? 
Would  it  not  be  marvellous  for  a  Jew,  with  all  his  love 
for  the  customs  and  principles  of  his  fathers,  to  keep 
perfect  silence,  if  informed  that  his  little  children  must 
be  excluded  from  the  Gospel  covenant?  And  yet  we 
hear  not  of  a  single  complaint  on  this  subject  from  the 
beginning  to  the  end  of  the  New  Testament.  Could  this 
have  been  so  had  their  children  been  refused  baptism  ? 

Such  was  the  zeal  with  which  certain  believers  among 
them  contended  for  the  necessity  of  circumcision  to 
Gentile  Christians,  that  it  was  made  a  matter  of  much 
disputation,  and  a  Council  called  to  settle  it :  which  de- 
cided in  the  negative,  and  letters  then  sent  by  messen- 
gers to  different  places  informing  Gentile  Christians 
that  Mosaic  ceremonies  were  not  binding  upon  them  ; 
but  recommending  that  they  should  follow  that  which 
will  promote  the  peace  of  the  Church — i.  e.  "to  abstain 
from  meats  offered  to  idols,  from  blood,  and  from  things 
strangled,  and  from  fornication."*  Nothing  is  said  in 
regard  to  any  rite  or  duty  peculiarly  Christian,  because 
there  -was  no  disagreement  about  anything  peculiar  to 
the  Christian  system.  To  this  the  Gentiles  had  strictly 
conformed.  Baptism  is  not  mentioned,  because  this 
they  had  received,  and  there  was  no  disputation  about 

■--Act?  XV.  1,  29. 


252  INFANT  MEMBERSHIP  IMPLIED. 

it ;  nor  vsliould  we  have  heard  anything  about  circum- 
cision had  they  been  unanimous  on  that  point  as 
they  were  in  regard  to  baptism.  Had  the  Gentiles 
hesitated  to  baptize  their  children,  or  the  Apostles 
refused  it  previously  to  the  children  of  Jewish  Chris- 
tians, there  Avould  have  been  room  or  cause  for  as  much 
controversy  about  baptism  as  about  circumcision.  But 
there  is  not  one  word  on  record  to  show  that  the  Apos- 
tles or  any  one  else  ever  taught  them  to  regard  their 
children  as  excluded  from  the  Christian  covenant.^" 
On  the  contrary,  gospel  liberty  permitted  the  Jewish 
believers  to  observe  the  whole  lavv^  of  Moses  as  long  as 
it  was  not  substituted  for  Christ,  nor  made  obligatory  on 
the  Gentile  Christians.  When,  however,  they  began  to 
substitute  works  for  grace,  and  place  Moses  before 
Christ,  a  warning  voice  was  quickly  raised,  and  the  evils 
pointed  out. 

If  any  one  doubts  the  adherence  of  Jewish  believers 
to  circumcision,  even  after  the  decision  of  the  Council, 
(Acts  XV.)  that  forbade  them  to  imj^ose  it  on  the  Gen- 
tiles, let  him  turn  to  the  21st  chapter  of  Acts  and  read 
what  St.  James  and  the  Elders  say  to  the  Apostle  Paul 
touching  this  point,  (verses  21,  22.)  "  Thou  seest, 
brother,  how  many  thousandsf  (tens  of  thousands)  of 
the  Jews  there  are  which  believe,  and  they  are  all  zeal- 
ous of  the  law  ;  and  they  are  infornicd  of  thee  that  thou 
teachest  all  the  Jews  which  are  among  the  Gentiles  to 

^>'  The  fact  that  tliey  urged  circumcision  on  the  Gentile  converts, 
proves  thej^  regarded  circumcision  as  necessary  to  all  Christians  and 
young  children  as  members,  because  circumcision  "was  as  binding  on 
children  as  on  adults. 

t  ^xjpcaSos,  "myriads." 


LIBERTY  UNDER  THE  GOSPEL.  253 

forsake  Moses — saying  that  they  ought  not  to  circum- 
cise their  children,  neither  walk  after  the  customs. 
What  is  it  therefore?  the  multitude  must  needs  come 
together,  for  they  will  hear  that  thou  art  come."  See 
how  soon  an  excitement  is  produced  by  the  rumor  that 
the  Apostle  taught,  their  children  need  not  be  circum- 
cised. 

This  visit  to  Jerusalem  was  made  by  St.  Paul,  accord- 
ing to  the  best  chronologers,*  about  twenty- five  years 
after  the  first  preaching  of  St.  Peter,  and  the  conversion 
of  the  three  thousand.  The  Jewish  converts  had  now,  as 
we  learn,  increased  to  many  thousands,  and  were  ^'  all 
zealous  of  the  law"  of  Moses.  A  report  that  the  Apos- 
tle Paul  had  been  teaching  their  brethren  scattered 
among  the  Gentiles,  that  "they  ought  not  to  circumcise 
their  children,  nor  observe  their  customs,"  had  caused 
much  excitement :  to  allay  which,  the  Apostle,  by  ad- 
vice, conforms  publicly  to  a  certain  Jewish 'rite,  (verses 
23,  27,)  to  satisfy  the  Jews  that  he  was  not  an  enemy 
to  Moses  rightly  understood.  For  if  he  could  observe 
the  ritual  law  Jdmself,  it  ought  to  convince  them  that 
he  would  not  forbid  others  to  do  the  same  under  proper 
circumstances,  and  that  he  himself  lived  according  to 
the  real  requirements  of  Moses — according  to  the  very 
thing  shadowed  forth  by  him. 

By  this  act,  we  learn  there  is  nothing  in  the  ritual 
law  that  a  conscientious  Christian  might  not  observe, 
provided,  he  in  no  way  substituted  it  for  the  Gospel.  It 
was  of  course  unnecessary  to  the  Christian,  because  the 
ritual  law  was  merely  the  shadow  of  the  more  substan- 
■<■  Home,  Whitby,  Townsend,  and  others. 

22 


251  GOSPEL  MADE  MORE  EXPLICIT. 

tial  things  to  come  Bnder  Christ.  And  this  he  did  not 
hesitate  to  declare,  (Col.  ii.  Heb.  x.)  and  to  show  that 
justification  was  by  faith,  and  not  by  the  deeds  of  the 
law.  "  By  the  deeds  of  the  law  shall  no  flesh  be  justi- 
fied," (Rom.  iii.  20,)  was  the  tenor  of  his  language. 
"A  man  is  justified  by  faith  without  the  deeds  of  the 
law."  (28th  verse.)  He  proved  to  them  also  from  the 
case  of  Abraham  that  "  Christ  is  the  end  of  the  law  for 
righteousness,  to  every  one  that  believeth."  (Rom.  x. 
4.)  And  in  all  suitable  Avays  did  he  labor  to  show  the 
use  of  the  law,  moral  and  ritual,  and  to  discourage  too 
strong  an  attachment  for  the  law  of  ceremonies,  forbid- 
ding even  its  observance,  if  looked  to  for  justification. 
(Gal.  V.  26.)  "  Christ  is  become  of  no  efi'ect  unto  you 
whosoever  of  you  are  justified  by  the  law ;  you  are 
fallen  from  grace."  ....  "For  in  Christ  Jesus 
neither  circumcision  availeth  anything  nor  uncircumcis- 
ion,  but  faith  which  worketh  by  love." 

Can  any  one  suppose  that  an  Apostle  who  was  so 
constant  and  unwearied  in  his  efforts  to  teach,  and  to 
keep  the  minds  of  Christians  rightly  informed  as  to  the 
nature  and  uses  of  the  law,  would  permit  the  Jewish 
Christians  to  circumcise  their  children  under  a  belief 
that  they  still  stood  in  the  same  relation  to  the  Church 
they  always  had  done,  and  never  correct  their  delusion, 
if  this  had  been  one  ?  Can  any  one,  we  repeat,  believe 
that  such  a  man  as  the  Apostle  Paul,  and  all  the  Apos- 
tles would  so  dissemble  with  the  first  Christians  as  to 
indulge  them  in  an  erroneous  belief  of  this  kind,  and 
never  correct  it?  It  is  impossible.  Common  honesty — 
their  course  in  regard  to  every  other  error,  to  say  no- 


GENERAL  SUMMARY.  255 

thing  of  piety,  forbid  the  supposition.  Yet  where  do 
we  find  a  single  sentence,  in  all  the  disputes  about  cir- 
cumcision, or  in  all  the  instructions  given  in  regard  to 
the  law,  its  uses,  and  reasons  for  its  discontinuance,  or 
in  Christ's  commission  to  his  Apostles,  or  his  remarks 
about  little  children,  that  even  intimates  that  there  is 
to  be  any  change  in  regard  to  them  under  the  Gospel 
dispensation  ?  Nowhere,  Such  an  intimation  is  not  to 
be  found  in  the  sacred  record.  Therefore  Christians 
are  bound  by  testimony,  positive  and  negative  in  its 
character — historical,  circumstantial,  and  inspired — to 
continue  infant  membership  and  family  religion  in  the 
Church  of  God. 

1.  It  IS  A  FACT,  that  Infant  baptism  was  the  acknow- 
ledged doctrine  and  common  practice  of  the  Christian 
Church  in  the  next  age  after  the  Apostles. 

2.  It  is  a  fact,  that  Infant  baptism  was  the  received 
doctrine  and  usage  of  Christians  before  the  books  of  the 
New  Testament  had  been  all  generally  received  among 
the  various  Churches,  and  the  question  of  their  inspira- 
tion settled. 

3.  It  is  a  fact,  that  Christian  cotemporaries  of  the 
Apostles,  and  the  Primitive  Fathers  generally,  taught 
that  "  all  ages,  young  and  old,  were  corrupt  through. 
the  infection  of  original  sin,  and  that  baptism  was  neces- 
sary to  all." 

4.  It  is  a  fact,  that  Infant  baptism  had  the  consen- 
tient testimony  of  all  antiquity  to  its  validity ;  that  this 
w^as  believed  "everywhere,  always,  by  all,"  in  the  Prim- 
itive Church,  so  far  as  anything  to  the  contrary  has 
been  found  on  record. 


256  GENERAL  SUMMARY. 

5.  It  is  a  fact,  tliat  the  most  noted  of  the  early 
Christian  Fatliers  taught  that  baptism  had  superseded 
circumcision — tluit  it  liekl  the  same  place  under  the  New 
Dispensation  which  eircuincision  held  under  the  old, 
and  hence  they  called  baptism  '•  Cliristian  circumcision." 

6.  It  is  a  fact,  that  the  first  Christians  did  for  some 
time  keep  both  the  old  Sabbath  and  the  Lord's  day,  and 
practiced  both  baptism  and  circumcision ;  and  that  cir- 
cumcision and  the  Jewish  Sabbath  gradually  ceased  to 
be  observed  in  the  Church,  leaving  only  baptism  and 
the  Lord's  day  remaining.  Therefore,  as  an  initiatory 
rite,  baptism  has  superseded  circumcision;  and  as  a  day 
of  rest,  the  Lord's  day  has  superseded  the  old  Sabbath. 
And, 

7.  It  has  been  shown,  that  the  Christian  Church  is 
the  continuation  of  the  Abraharaic  Covenant  of  Grace, 
(Gal.  iii.  15,  17;  Matt.  xxi.  43;  Rom.  xi.  17,  18,  and 
others,)  enlarged  in  its  application  and  more  spiritual 
in  its  discipline.  Hence,  baptism  holds  the  same  j^lcLc^^t 
in  the  same  Churchy  and  fulfills  the  same  spiritual  ends 
of  circumcision,  and  by  virtue  of  the  right  of  little  chil- 
dren to  circumcision,  they  have  an  unquestionahle  legal 
right  to  baptism. 

8.  It  has  been  shown,  that  the  first  Christians 
received  the  Gospel  as  the  fulfilment  of  the  promises 
made  to  their  fathers,  and  the  continuation  and  perfect- 
ing of  that  which  was  already  begun — hence  continued 
the  circumcision  of  their  little  children  and  other  rites 
of  the  Jewish  Church,  which  proves  that  they  still  re- 
garded little  children  as  members,  which  they  would  not 
have  done  if  baptism  had  teen  denied  them.     And, 


GENERAL  SCJMMARY.  257 

9.  It  has  been  shown,  that  the  mistake  of  Hebrew 
Christians  in  supposing  that  with  the  continuation  of 
the  Abrahamic  Covenant  of  Grace,  the  Mosaic  economy 
was  also  to  be  continued  under  the  Gospel  Dispensation, 
would  have  been  corrected  in  the  beginning,  if  when 
they  passed  into  the  Gospel  Dispensation  by  baptism, 
their  little  children  were  not  allowed  to  pass  with  them — 
refused  entrance  but  with  the  remark,  "  They  cannot  be 
baptized."  A  thing  so  contrary  to  the  feelings,  educa- 
tion, and  practice  of  a  Jew,  must  have  called  up  dis- 
cussion in  regard  to  circumcision  and  the  baptism  of 
little  children  in  the  commencement  of  the  New  Dispen- 
sation. Instead  of  which,  the  circumcision  of  little 
children  was  quietly  continued  for  some  years,  and 
when  Gentile  converts  were  brought  into  the  Church,  the 
same  was  urged  upon  them  also,  as  a  necessary  Christian 
duty.  Had  all  the  little  children  circumcised  up  to  this 
time  been  refused  baptism,  how  the  most  strict  adherent 
to  Moses  could  suppose  that  two  rites,  so  long  sepa- 
rated, must  now  be  united,  is  unaccountable.  But  admit 
that  their  little  ones  had  also  been  baptized,  then  silence 
on  the  subject  down  to  that  time,  and  the  union  of  the 
two  rites  on  Gentile  converts,  would  be  natural.     And, 

10.  We  have  seen,  that  instead  of  closing  the  door 
of  his  kingdom  against  little  children,  that  the  Saviour 
himself  rebuked  those  who  attempted  to  keep  the  little 
ones  from  him  when  on  earth,  and  took  them  up  in  his 
arms  and  blessed  them,  and  said,  "Of  such  is  the  kino-- 
dom  of  God."     And, 

11.  We  have  seen,  that  instead  of  limitinc;  their 
privileges,  and  excluding  them  from  his  covenant  under 

22* 


258  GENERAL  SUMxMARY. 

the  Gospel  Dispensation,  the  Saviour  issued  his  commis- 
sion to  the  Apostles  in  terms  of  the^  widest  possible 
comprehension,  embracing  all  nations,  and  when  con- 
strued according  to  the  established  laws  of  interpreting 
ancient  writings,  applying  to  little  children  as  strictly  as 
to  adults.     And, 

12.  We  have  seen,  that  in  the  first  sermon  preached 
under  the  Gospel  Dispensation,  the  promise  made  to 
children  with  their  parents,  was  referred  to  by  St.  Pe- 
ter, To  the  inquiring  multitude,  he  said,  "  The  promise 
is  to  you  and  to  your  children,"  &c.     And, 

13.  We  have  seen,  that  the  Apostles  baptized  whole 
families,  without  respect  to  age,  so  far  as  the  record 
shows ;  for  family  baptisms  ar^  recorded  as  if  a  usual 
thing,  and  only  the  names  of  the  heads  of  'them  men- 
tioned, as  if  they  alone  were  the  responsible  agents. 
And, 

14.  We  have  seen,  that  children  are  included  in  the 
Epistles  written  to  the  Churches,  and  instructions  given 
them,  and  to  their  parents  concerning  them  ;  and  that 
the  same  appellation  of  "faithfuls"  and  "holy"  are  ap- 
plied to  them  that  are  applied  to  other  members  of  the 
Church. 

Finally,  the  faithfulness  of  the  parent  in  "  bringing 
up  his  children  in  the  nurture  and  admonition  of  the 
Lord,"  was  regarded  by  St.  Paul  as  a  necessary  qualifi- 
cation for  the  appointment  to  the  office  of  a  ruler  in  the 
Church. 

Who,  therefore,  can  be  surprised  at  finding  the  bap- 
tism of  little  children  continuing  to  be  the  common  prac- 
tice of  the  next  generation  after  the  Apostles  ? 


GENERAL  SUMMARY.  269 

AVlietlier  we  go  up  the  stream  from  the  present  to 
the  Apostolic  age,  we  shall  find  young  children  received 
into  the  Church  during  every  stage  of  our  ascent, — or 
whether  we  start  from  the  days  of  Abraham  and  come 
down  it,  we  shall  find  them  made  members  of  the 
Church  at  every  succeeding  step.  And  on  reaching 
the  days  of  the  Saviour,  instead  of  the  slightest  intima- 
tion that  a  change  is  then  to  take  place,  every  thing  is 
of  the  opposite  character.  His  own  words  and  acts, 
and  the  words  and  acts  of  the  Apostles,  rightly  con- 
strued, show  that  young  children  are  still  to  be  received 
and  doubtless  were  received.  And  in  passing  into  the 
next  age,  we  find  their  baptism  common — and  not  one 
calling  in  question  the  authority  for  it.  Were  we 
therefore  to  admit  that  the  Holy  Scriptures  are  silent 
on  the  subject,  (which  they  certainly  are  not,  when 
rightly  construed,)  how  shall  we  account  for  the  fact 
that  in  following  the  stream  of  time,  we  find  little 
children  in  the  Church  until  we  reach  the  Apostolic  age, 
and  then  again  as  soon  as  we  leave  it  ?  Suppose,  in 
ascending  a  river,  we  were  to  find  in  its  waters  certain 
peculiar  qualities  till  we  reach  a  certain  place  through 
which  we  could  not  pass,  and  were  obliged  to  travel  by 
land  some  miles  before  we  came  to  the  river  again,  but 
at  the  point  at  which  we  entered,  find  its  waters  possess- 
ing the  same  peculiar  qualities  that  we  marked  in  them 
at  the  time  we  left  them,  should  we  not  conclude  that 
they  possessed  the  same  peculiar  qualities  between  these 
two  points  ?  .^ould  we  doubt  it  ? 

Now.  apply  this  to  the  case  in  hand.  The  opposers  of 
Infant  baptism  must  admit  that  from  the  time  of  Abra- 


260  GENERAL  SUMMARY. 

ham  to  that  of  Christ,  young  children  were  received 
into  covenant  with  God— and  again,  that  from  the  first 
age  after  the  Apostles  down  to  the  present  time,  they 
have  been  received  into  the  Church.  What  then  may 
we  infer  was  probably  the  case  during  the  time  the 
Apostles  lived  ?  Were  the  qualities  of  the  waters  the 
same  while  passing  over  that  short  space,  which  they 
were  just  before,  and  just  afterwards  ;  or  were  they  dif- 
ferent between  these  points  and  precisely  the  same 
again  at  them  ?  Were  little  children  made  members  of 
the  Church  just  before,  and  again,  just  after  the  Apos- 
tolic age,  but  excluded  during  that  century,  and  not  one 
word  left  on  record  to  inform  us  of  the  fact?  Nay, 
the  language  of  the  record  rightly  construed,  informs 
us  in  various  places,  that  little  children  were  received 
into  the  Church  during  that  century  as  well  as  every 
other,  that  they  have  always  been  precious  in  the  sight 
of  God,  and  ever  permitted  to  form  a  part  of  His  pecu- 
liar people. 

1.  And  why  not?  If  he  who  adds  sins  of  his  own 
to  his  original  sin,  shall  on  repentance  have  all  his  sins 
washed  away,  both  actual  and  original,  may  not  he  who 
has  committed  no  sin  of  his  own  have  his  original  sin 
washed  away?  Is  it  necessary  to  add  to  original  sin 
actual  sins,  to  repent  of,  before  one  can  have  the  remis- 
sion of  any  sin  ?  Think  for  a  moment — we  are  all  born 
in  sin,  inheritors  of  Adam's  fallen  nature,  "  shapen  in 
in  iniquity,"  and  "by  nature  the  children  of  wrath;" — 
every  child,  therefore,  born  into  the  world^iias  original, 
or  birth  sin;  and  this,  which  is  the  root  and  foundation 
of  actual  sin,  needs  a  remedy  and  the   appliances   of 


ORIGINAL  AND  ACTUAL  SINS.  261 

Gospel  grace,  as  much  as  do  the  effects  flowing  from  it. 
Baptism  has  been  ordained  by  Christ  as  the  means  or 
visible  sign  of  the  washing  away  of  all  sin:  why  tlien 
withhold  it  from  those  involved  in  original  sin,  because 
they  have  not  superadded  to  it  actual  sins  ? 

If  to  every  unconscious  babe  of  Adam's  descendants 
original  sin  has  been  transmitted,  and  this  must  be 
repented  of  before  it  can  be  pardoned,  what  becomes 
of  all  who  die  before  they  commit  actual  sins  ?  Do  they 
die  unpardoned?  and  are  all  infants  lost?  If  not,  and 
Christ  has  atoned  for  their  original  sin,  why  withhold 
the  appliances  of  Gospel  grace  and  the  blessings  vouch- 
safed to  his  redeemed  ones?  If  repentance  and  faith 
after  actual  sin,  entitle  one  to  the  seal  of  the  forgive- 
ness of  all  sin  actual  and  original,  certainly  they  who 
have  committed  no  actual  sin  of  their  own  of  which  to 
repent,  ought  to  be  entitled  to  the  seal  of  forgiveness  of 
original  sin,  and  all  the  blessings  accompanying  God's 
holy  ordinances  when  rightly  observed. 

Christ  died  to  redeem  little  children  as  well  as  adults. 
The  sin  of  the  first  Adam  passed  upon  all,  and  the  pro- 
vision made  in  the  second  Adam  was  commensurate  with 
the  evils  of  the  first.  "As  by  the  offence  of  one,  judg- 
ment came  upon  all  .men  to  condemnation,  even  so  by 
the  righteousness  of  one,  the  free  gift  came  upon  all 
men  unto  justification  of  life.  For  as  by  one  man's 
disobedience  many  were  made  sinners,  so  by  the  obe- 
dience of  one  shall  many  be  made  righteous.  Where 
sin  abounded  grace  did  much  more  abound."  Rom.  v. 
18,  19,  20.  Hence  the  remedy  provided  is  co-extensive 
with  the  evil  entailed,  and  offered  as  a  free  gift  to  all. 


262  THE  CHURCH  A  NURSERY. 

And  little  children  being  involved  in  the  sin  of  the  first 
Adam,  are  therefore  included  in  the  provision  made  by 
the  second.     And, 

For  the  more  effectual  application  of  the  remedy, 
God  instituted  his  church  as  a  nursery  or  school,  and 
ordained  means  whereby  the  graces  and  gifts  of  the 
Holy  Spirit  are  nurtured  and  made  more  effective  in 
enlivening  and  invigorating  the  spiritual  powers  of  the 
soul,  to  fit  it  for  his  spiritual  kingdom.  Into  this  nur- 
sery all  are  brought  b}^  baptism,  and  none  can  need  its 
protecting  care  and  aid  more  than  little  children;  and 
the  sooner  they  are  taken  into  it,  and  the  more  faith- 
fully they  are  nurtured  and  instructed  in  the  ways  of 
godliness,  the  more  certainly  will  they  become  fitted  for 
that  spiritual  church  for  which  this  on  earth  was 
founded.  Had  half  the  time  and  labor  consumed  in 
discussions  and  theory-making  about  the  effects  of  bap- 
tism, been  devoted  to  the  duties  implied  and  the  faithful 
discharge  of  the  obligations  imposed,  a  thousandfold 
greater  would  have  been  the  benefits  conferred  on  the 
church. 

The  great  end,  doubtless,  of  all  the  institutions  of  our 
blessed  Redeemer,  is  to  save  the  souls  of  fallen  men. 
For  this  he  came  to  earth  and  died;  for  this  he  founded 
a  church  and  ordained  means  of  grace;  and  the  more 
faithfully  we  adhere  to  the  order  that  he  has  authorized, 
and  use  the  means  that  he  has  appointed,  the  more  suc- 
cessful will  every  one  bo.  in  fitting  himself  and  his  children 
for  the  kingdom  of  heaven.  The  more  diligently  we 
instruct  our  children,  and  the  more  tenderly  we  lead 
them  on  in  the  duties  of  religion;  the  more  cautiously 


THE  saviour's  ESTIMATION  OF  BAPTISM.  268 

"we  preserve  them  from  evil,  and  the  more  thoroughly 
we  imbue  them  with  the  principles  and  practices  of  his 
church;  the  more  certain  will  be  our  success  in  making 
them  truly  Christians.  Not  by  trusting  to  the  letter 
and  opus  operatum  of  ordinances,  but  looking  to  and  in- 
voking the  accompanying  influence  of  the  Holy  Spirit 
on  our  efforts. 

To  affirm  that  children  can  be  trained  in  the  ways  of 
religion  as  well  out  of  the  church  as  in  it,  is  the  same  as 
to  affirm  that  men  can  be  saved  as  well  without  a  church 
as  Avith  one.  It  is  virtually  impeaching  the  wisdom  of 
God  in  organizing  a  church  at  all.  And  to  ask,  as  some 
sneeringly  do,  "  What  good  can  baptism  do  little  child- 
ren?" is  to  ask,  what  good  it  can  do  an  adult?  For 
there  is  no  reason  why  it  may  not  do  as  much  for  one 
age  as  another.  Hence  the  implied  objection  would 
make  it  unnecessary  to  any  one.  And  yet  our  Saviour 
says,  "Except  a  man,"  any  one  (sav fxiq  tis)  "be  born  of 
water  and  of  the  Spirit,  he  cannot  enter  into  the  king- 
dom of  God." 

Now  which  shall  rule  us,  the  words  of  Christ,  or  heed- 
less objectors?  He  certainly  regarded  baptism  of  great 
importance,  or  he  would  not  have  made  it  necessary  "  to 
enter  into  his  kingdom."  And  whether  he  meant  his 
kingdom  on  earth  or  in  heaven,  or  included  both,  does 
not  affect  the  authority  of  his  words,  or  the  obligations 
which  they  impose  upon  every  one.  Neither  can  differ- 
ence of  opinion  on  the  effects  of  baptism,  affect  its  neces- 
sity and  importance  where  it  can  be  had.  Whether  it 
regenerates  men  in  a  lower  sense,  or  is  the  sign  of 
regeneration  in  a  higher  sense — whether  it  washes  away 


264  REGENERATION  AND  CONVERSION. 

original  sin  in  infants  and  applies  to  them  the  redemp- 
tion of  Christ,  thus  transferring  them  from  under  the 
condemnation  of  the  first  Adam  to  the  liberty  and  bless- 
ings of  the  second — or  whether  it  is  only  the  sign  and 
outward  recognition  of  the  washing  away  of  sin,  and  of  the 
application  of  Christ's  atonement,  certifying  to  them 
their  redemption,  and  placing  them  in  new  relations  to 
God ;  its  author  is  the  same^  and  that  being  Divine,  no  man 
may  lay  it  aside.  Even  the  lowest  theory  in  regard  to 
its  office,  m.ay  possess  an  importance  in  the  economy  of 
grace  far  beyond  our  highest  conceptions. 

Because  one  "  believes  the  child  baptized  is  washed 
from  the  guilt  of  original  sin,  and  grafted  into  the  mys- 
tical body  of  Christ  and  made  a  partaker  of  the  Spirit," 
— and  he  calls  this  "regeneration  and  the  new  birth," — 
and  when  a  penitent  soul  turns  with  all  his  heart  from 
sin  and  Satan  to  God  andholiness,  this  he  calls  "  con- 
version," which,  he  says  "may  take  place  before  or 
after  regeneration;"  and  another  believes  regeneration 
includes  conversion;  it  does  not  follow  that  there  is  no 
regeneration  or  conversion.*  Nor  does  it  follow,  because 
there  are  differences  of  opinion  in  regard  to  the  effects 
of  baptism  on  adult  age,  that  there  is  no  authority  for 
the  baptism  of  that  age.  On  the  same  principle,  differ- 
ences of  opinion  in  regard  to  the  effects  of  infant  bap- 
tism, constitute  no  valid  objection  to  the  authority  of 
the  rite  itself.  All  agree  that  baptism  puts  the  child 
into  a  new  state — removes  it  from  its  birth-state  of 
wratli,  into  the  state  of  the  cliildren  of  grace — makes 
it   a   member  of  Christ's  visible   church — suil-ounds    it 

■■'■  SiuTHMicnt  of  Ros])onsibility. 


FULFILLMENT  OF  CONDITIONS  NECESSARY.  265 

with  all  the  means  of  grace — secures  to  it  the  covenant 
seal  and  pledges  of  forgiveness  of  all  sin;  and  that  if 
the  conditions  of  this  covenant  engagement  are  fulfilled, 
it  will  finally  be  admitted  into  the  kingdom  of  God. 

Here  is  enough  to  fill  every  heart  with  the  deepest 
solicitude  for  the  baptism  of  their  little  ones;  and  if 
greater  blessings  still,  as  some  suppose,  accompany  the 
ordinance,  then  greater,  if  possible,  ought  to  be  that 
solicitude.  And  if  so  much  interest  be  justly  felt,  in 
regard  to  bringing  them  into  covenant  relations  with  God, 
deeper  and  greater  still  should  be  our  anxiety  for  the 
fulfillment  of  every  condition  expressed  or  implied  in 
that  covenant.  For  as  an  estate  may  be  made  over  to 
a  minor  on  conditions  and  promises  made  for  him  by  his 
guardian,  and  the  covenant  be  signed  and  sealed,  and 
the  estate  called  by  his  name,  and  spoken  of  as  his,  yet 
if  he  violates  the  conditions,  he  forfeits  the  possession ! 
which  may  be  owing  chiefly  to  the  neglect  of  the  guar- 
dian in  instructing  him,  and  impressing  his  mind  with 
the  importance  of  what  was  involved,  and  the  nature  of 
the  conditions  to  be  fulfilled. 

So  when  parents  bring  their  little  children  to  baptism, 
they  should  remember  that  it  is  to  make  them  members 
of  Christ's  church  and  heirs  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven ; 
that  for  them  and  in  their  names  they  promise  to  fulfill 
all  the  duties  of  a  member  of  his  church,  to  wit,  "bring 
them  up  in  the  nurture  and  admonition  of  the  Lord." 
So  train  and  instruct  them  in  the  doctrines  and  prac- 
tices of  his  religion,  that  by  the  blessings  of  the  Holy 
Spirit,  they  shall  never  depart  from  them,  but  fulfill 
all  the  conditions  of  their  heirship.     For  this  end,  let 


266  GRADES  OF    MEMBERSHIP. 

the  first  impressions  made  upon  their  tender  minds  be 
heavenly  in  their  nature.  Preserve  them  from  evil 
influences  without,  and  bring  the  appliances  of  gospel 
grace  with  their  quickening  and  sanctifying  influences 
through  the  Spirit  to  bear  upon  their  impressible  hearts 
from  infancy  to  manhood.  Lead  them  on  from  one 
degree  of  knowledge  to  another.  Instruct  them  in  first 
principles  and  then  in  higher  branches.  Show  them  the 
privileges  and  advantages  of  being  a  member  of  Christ's 
church.  Appeal  to  them  as  members,  and  gradually 
prepare  them  to  understand  and  rightly  appreciate  the 
responsibility  of  their  membership. 

It  does  not  follow  that  because  one  is  a  member  of 
Christ's  church,  he  is  therefore  qualified  for  all  its 
duties  or  can  enjoy  all  the  privileges  of  membership, 
any  more  than  because  one  is  a  citizen  of  our  country, 
therefore  he  enjoys  all  the  privileges  of  citizenship.  A 
child  enjoys  all  the  essential  rights  of  a  citizen;  has  a 
claim  to  the  protection  and  all  the  privileges  common 
to  the  citizens  of  his  country,  but  he  has  not  the  right 
to  vote  in  the  election  of  the  rulers  of  his  country  before 
he  is  twenty-one  years  of  age,  nor  to  exercise  other 
functions  dependent  on  conditions  which  he  cannot  or 
has  not  fulfilled.  So  infant  members  of  the  church 
enjoy  all  the  essential  rights  of  its  covenanted  privi- 
leges— its  seal  and  promises,  the  right  of  instruction, 
means  of  grace  and  fostering  care.  But  they  are  not 
qualified  for  the  higher  privileges  of  adult  members,  to 
vote  in  the  councils  of  the  church,  and  to  partake  of 
the  Lord's  supper  profitably — not  being  able  to  ''  dis- 
cern the  Lord's  body"  by  faith.     1  Cor.  xi.  29;  which 


IMPORTANCE  OF  FAITHFUL  TRAINING.  2^7 

is  an  important  privilege,  and  for  which  all  diligence 
should  be  used  to  prepare  them  as  soon  as  possible. 

It  has  been  supposed  by  some,  that  because  infants 
partook  of  the  passover  at  its  first  institution,  which  was 
to  be  a  commemorative  rite,  therefore  the  sacrament 
of  the  supper  might  be  given  to  them.  But  it  does  not 
appear  that  the  children  of  the  Jews  partook  of  the  pass- 
over  after  they  were  settled  in  Canaan  till  after  twelve 
years  of  age.  Such  was  the  custom  in  our  Saviour's 
time."^  The  passover,  however,  was  a  part  of  the  Mosaic 
covenant  not  of  the  Abrahamic,  and  therefore  does  not 
stand  on  the  same  ground  with  circumcision.  From  the 
nature  of  things,  the  church  on  earth  must  be  composed 
of  various  classes  of  members,  consisting  not  only  of 
different  degrees  of  growth  in  grace,  but  of  some  abso- 
lutely bad  as  well  as  good.  This  our  Saviour  told  us 
would  be  the  case,  and  compared  his  church  to  a  "net 
that  was  cast  into  the  sea  and  gathered  of  every  kind, 
which  when  it  was  full  they  drew  to  shore,  and  sat  down 
and  gathered  the  good  into  vessels,  but  cast  the  bad 
away."  St.  Matt.  xiii.  47,  48.  And  the  proportion  of 
the  good  to  the  bad  of  every  family  gathered  into  this 
net,  will  depend,  doubtless,  more  upon  the  faithfulness 
of  the  parents  in  training  up  their  children  than  upon 
any  other  earthly  means.  Nothing  human  has  so  much 
influence  on  the  formation  of  character  in  after  life  as 
faithful  training  in  childhood  and  early  youth.  The 
future  man  is  generally  formed  and  fashioned  in  the 
nursery.  The  moral  and  religious  sentiments  there  in- 
stilled into  the  minds  of  our  children  accompany  them 
*  St.  Luke  ii.  41,  42. 


268  IMPORTANCE  OF  FAITHFUL  TRAINING. 

through  life.  If  shaken  off  at  any  time,  they  will  return 
again,  unless  our  children  are  thrown  under  contrary  in- 
fluence and  teaching  before  their  characters  are  formed. 
It  sometimes  happens  that  they  are  sent  from  under  the 
parental  roof,  and  exposed  to  infidel  and  immoral  influ- 
ences so  young,  that  all  that  had  been  done  for  them  in 
earlier  years  is  lost. 

But  this  is  like  leaving  any  other  important  work 
unfinished.  If  we  w^ould  establish  them  in  the  doctrines 
and  habits  of  morality  and  religion,  we  must  traiJi  thejn 
up  to  manhood  and  womanhood.  Not  begin  to  train  them 
and  stop  before  their  habits  are  half  formed,  but  con- 
tinue the  good  work  till  it  is  completed,  until  they  are 
confirmed  in  the  ways  of  truth.  To  train  a  child  a  few 
years  and  give  it  up  unto  its  own  heart's  desires,  or 
expose  it  to  evil  influences,  is  like  rolling  a  stone  half 
up  the  mountain  side,  and  leaving  it  to  itself  to  roll 
down  again  to  its  base.  Fallen  nature  needs  training 
up  to  manhood,  as  the  stone  should  be  rolled  onward  till 
it  reaches  the  mountain  top  and  rests  on  the  plain  above 
where  we  would  have  it  placed,  if  we  would  crown  our 
efi"orts  with  success.  How  many  are  ruined  because 
taken  from  under  the  pious  nurture  of  the  mother,  or 
catechetical  class  of  the  minister,  before  confirmed  in 
the  doctrines  and  duties  of  religion  ! 

All  experience  testifies  to  the  importance  of  training 
children  in  the  principles  and  practices  which  we  would 
have  them  to  continue  through  life.  But  to  have  them 
baptized,  and  then  neglect  to  train  them  in  the  princi- 
ples and  according  to  the  conditions  stipulated,  is  virtu- 
ally to  renounce  their  baptism.      It  is  like  making  a 


IMPORTANCE  OF  FAITHFUL  TRAINING.  269 

a  minor  an  heir  to  an  estate,  as  already  referred  to,  and 
then  refusing  the  aid  necessary  to  enable  him  to  comply 
with  the  conditions  of  its  final  possession.  And  it  is  for 
this  reason  that  the  church  of  God  in  every  age  has 
required  some  security  for  the  faithful  training  in  the 
Tvays  of  the  Lord  the  little  ones  brought  to  it  for  bap- 
tism ;  that  the  members  of  the  church  who  bring  their 
infant  children  to  dedicate  them  to  God  in  his  church, 
and  make  them  members  of  the  same,  shall  pledge 
themselves  to  train  them  as  such  members  ought  to  be 
trained.  The  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in  this 
country  requires,  where  it  can  be  had,  additional  secu- 
rity to  that  of  the  parents ;  that  for  every  male  child 
two  male  securities  and  one  female,  and  for  every 
female  child  two  female  securities  and  one  male;  which 
are  called  "  God-fathers  and  God-mothers,"  or  "  sure- 
ties." So  important  does  she  hold  the  proper  training 
of  her  infant  members,  that  she  provides  a  substitute 
and  aid  to  the  parents,  in  the  case  of  their  death  or 
neglect  of  this  great  duty.  And  all  necessary  instruc- 
tion and  care  beyond  this,  devolve  immediately  upon 
her  authorized  ministers. 

Were  it  not  that  baptism  is  only  the  beginning — the 
initiatory  of  a  great  and  glorious  inheritance,  requirino- 
future  corresponding  action,  we  might  baptize  every 
child  we  meet  in  the  street,  if  permitted,  for  all  have 
been  redeemed  by  Christ ;  but  why  receive  into  a  cove- 
nant those  for  whom  there  is  no  reason  to  hope  they 
will  ever  comply  with  its  conditions  or  enjoy  any  lasting 
benefit  from  it  ?  Why  encourage  the  abuse,  and  bring 
into  disrepute  things  sacred,  that  may  be  even  trampled 

23=^ 


270  IMPORTANCE  OF  FAITHFUL  TRAIKIKG. 

upon  and  cast  away  by  those  to  whom  they  are  given  ? 
In  cases  of  danger,  where  death,  instead  of  a  long  life* 
and  the  prospect  of  a  better  state  of  things,  seems  to  be 
the  only  alternative,  we  baptize  without  sureties,  if 
necessary,  because  we  would  not  withhold  from  the 
dying  any  benefit  conferred  by  the  rite  itself.  And  if 
the  child  live,  we  use  all  diligence  to  secure  for  it  after- 
wards the  necessary  nurture  and  instruction  of  a  child 
of  the  church. 

But  in  all  cases  where  there  is  the  ordinary  prospect 
of  continued  life  in  the  child,  it  should  be  presented  for 
baptism  by  pious  sponsors,  who  conscientiously  intend 
to  fulfill  the  duties  required  at  their  hands  by  the 
Church.  If  the  parents  are  not  such  themselves,  and 
wish  their  children  to  be  baptized,  they  should  procure 
responsible  persons,  and  pledge  themselves  to  give  up 
these  children  to  the  religious  training  of  them  who  shall 
consent  to  act  in  their  places,  and  fulfill  the  correspond- 
ing duties  ;  which  is  a  serious  undertaking,  and  ought 
be  w^ell  weighed  by  every  sponsor  before  such  responsi- 
bility is  assumed.  While  we  withhold  baptism  from 
none,  when  there  is  the  hope  that  it  will  be  properly 
appreciated,  and  prove  a  final  blessing ;  important  as  it 
is,  we  cannot  anticipate  for  little  ones  much  permanent 
good,  when  they  have  not  faithful  parents,  natural  or 
adopted,  who  set  the  example,  and  faithfully  teach  them 
the  precepts  of  Christians ;  who  feel  the  responsibility 
resting  upon  them,  and  endeavor  faithfully  to  discharge 
it. 

Alas  !  how  often  do  we  find  that  even  members  of 
the  Church  dedicate  their  children  to  God  in  infancy, 


IMPORTAJ<CE  OF  FAITHFUL  TRAINING.  271 

and  promise  to  his  Church  in  his  presence,  to  train  them 
in  the  duties  and  doctrines  of  the  Church,  afterwards 
give  up  these  same  children  to  the  care  and  teaching 
of  those  who  they  know  hoki  doctrines  contrary  to  those 
they  pledged  themselves  to  teach  them  !  For  the  sake  of 
some  vain  accomplishment,  or  some  supposed  worldly 
gain,  the  immortal  soul  of  the  child  dedicated  to  God,  is 
subjected  to  influences  of  dangerous  tendency,  and  its 
religious  principles  budding  into  life,  rooted  up  and 
supplanted  with  the  briars  and  thorns  of  this  world,  or 
the  corrupt  theory  of  a  corrupt  Church  !  How  a  parent, 
conscious  of  the  responsibility  of  his  position,  having 
dedicated  his  child  to  God  in  baptism,  and  made  it 
a  member  of  a  Church,  and  promised  to  bring  it 
up  in  the  doctrines  and  principles  of  that  Church, 
can  then  send  it  away  to  be  trained  by  those  who  de- 
nounce that  Church,  and  teach  doctrines  contrary  to 
and  subversive  of  those  which  he  is  pledged  before  G-od 
and  man  to  instill  into  its  mind,  we  cannot  reconcile  on 
Christian  principles.  Yet  there  are  Protestants,  who 
have  renounced  the  errors  of  Popery,  and  freed  them- 
selves from  its  galling  yoke  of  bondage,  who  send  their 
children  to  its  schools,  where  they  may  be  instructed 
in  the  same  errors  and  imbued  with  the  same  principles 
which  they  have  renounced  and  hold  to  be  dangerous  to 
the  souls  and  bodies  of  men. 

This  is  one  of  the  strange  things  in  this  strange  age  of 
moral  and  religious  culture.  The  Roman  Church  is 
making  converts  almost  daily  by  means  of  its  schools ; 
and  these  schools,  as  every  one  knows  who  has  had 
the   opportunity  to  examine  their  pupils,   are   inferior. 


272  IMPORTANCE  OF  FAITHFUL  TRAINING. 

in  point  of  tJiorough  literary  instructiorf,  to  the  best 
grade  of  Protestant  schools.  Yet  parents  and  guar- 
dians of  Protestant  children  persist  in  patronizing  them, 
and  leaving  our  own  schools  to  languish !  And  for  this 
we  have  never  heard  but  two  reasons  assigned. 

The  first  is,  that  Roman  Catholic  schools  are  a  little 
cheaper  than  other  schools.  But  shall  a  Christian  man 
endanger  the  soul  of  his  child,  for  such  a  considera- 
tion as  this  ?  Will  he  sell  the  soul  of  his  child,  or 
run  the  risk  of  its  being  sold  for  a  few  dollars ! 
Is  the  body  worth  so  much  more  than  the  soul 
that  we  can  risk  the  sacrifice  of  the  eternal  interests 
of  the  latter  for  some  slight  benefit  to  the  former? 
Doubtless  the  chief  reason  for  making  these  schools 
cheaper,  is  to  tempt  the  cupidity  of  men  and  draw  in 
Protestant  children  for  the  purpose  of  proselyting  them. 
And  to  all  such  as  are  likely  to  be  caught  by  such  bait 
as  "this,  we  would  say,  first  make  the  estimate  of  how 
much  you  may  save  on  the  one  hand,  and  see  if  you 
cannot  live  without  it  ?  Then  consider  how  much,  on 
the  other  hand,  may  be  the  loss  of  yourself  and  chil- 
dren at  the  bar  of  Judgment,  and  whether  the  gain  will 
equal  your  final  loss. 

The  other  reason  is,  that  their  children  will  be  more 
secluded  from  company  and  more  closely  watched.  If 
this  be  an  object,  why  not  keep  them  at  home,  and  em- 
ploy a  governess  ?  or  send  them  to  some  boarding  or 
family  school  in  the  country,  and  make  the  request  of 
the  teacher  to  keep  them  from  society?  We  know 
many  such  schools,  in  which  they  will  learn  as  little 
evil  and  more  good  than  in  a  Roman  Convent.     They 


IMPORTANCE  OE  FAITHFUL  TEAINIXG.  273 

will  undoubtedly  hear  fewer  legends  and  become  less 
superstitious,  and  bavo  their  respect  for  their  parents 
and  confidence  in  their  religion  less  shaken  than  in  a 
Roman  Catholic  school.  But  if  you  wish  your  child  to 
become  alienated  from  you,  and  to  practice  deception, 
to  turn  Rom.anists  or  cast  off  all  religion  as  a  fable,  send 
it  to  Convents,  and  you  will  attain  your  end  ! 

But  do  not  make  it  first  a  member  of  another  Church, 
and  violate  your  vows  to  God  and  his  Church  to  use  all 
diligence  to  bring  it  up  in  the  faith  and  doctrines  of 
that  Church,  and  to.  make  it  a  worthy  member  of  the 
same.  For  in  so  doing  3^ou  will  add  to  the  sin  of  sub- 
jecting it  to  evil  influences  willingly,  that  of  violating 
an  implied  pledge  to  the  contrary  !  Consider,  we  pray 
you,  dear  reader,  what  constitutes  faithfulness  to  the 
souls  of  your  little  children.  To  you  is  committed  the 
responsible  charge  of  shaping  their  course  for  time  and 
eternity  !  Not  only  the  care  of  their  bodies,  but  of 
their  souls,  rests  upon  you,  and  unfaithfulness  in  either 
may  involve  them  in  irreparable  loss,  and  you  in  grie- 
vous sin  !  Their  souls  are  immortal,  and  to  them  must 
be  given  attention  second  only  to  your  own  salvation. 
The  welfare  of  their  bodies  should  be  made  next  to  your 
OAvn  also.  But  in  both  cases,  the  importance  of  the  life 
to  come,  so  far  exceeds  the  things  of  this  life,  that  to 
endanger  the  soul  for  any  supposed  benefit  to  the  body, 
is  inverting  the  order  and  setting  at  naught  the  com- 
mand of  God,  and  involves  unfaithfulness  and  disobe- 
dience of  the  most  serious  kind.  For  to  us  and  our 
children  the  command  is,  "Seek  first  the  kinordom  of 
God  and  his  righteousness,  and  all  these  things  shall  be 
added  unto  you."     Matt.  vi.  33. 


274  IMPORTANCE  OF  FAITHFUL  TRAINING. 

Subjecting  unnecessarily  the  impressible  souls  of  our 
dear  little  children  to  erroneous  teaching,  or  evil  influ- 
ences of  any  kind,  that  may  ruin  them  forever,  must  be 
a  sin  of  a  much  higher  grade  than  is  generally  sup- 
posed. And  in  most  cases,  it  has  been  followed  by  conse- 
quences, even  in  this  life,  of  the  most  painful  character. 
A  great  change  must  yet  come  over  the  minds  of  the 
vast  majority  of  those  who  have  the  charge  of  little 
children,  before  they  will  rightly  appreciate  their  respon- 
sibility, and  do  justice  to  the  rising  generation. 

It  is  not,  however,  because  God  and  his  Church  have 
not  placed  this  subject  rightly  before  the  minds  of  men, 
that  it  is  not  better  understood.  It  has  been  earnestly 
inculcated,  and  pressed  upon  their  attention  in  every 
age.  It  was  because  of  Abraham's  faithfulness  in  this 
very  duty  that  God  commended  him  and  showed  him 
special  favors.  "And  the  Lord  said,  shall  I  hide  from 
Abraham  that  thing  which  I  do;  seeing  that  Abra- 
ham shall  surely  become  a  great  nation,  and  all  the 
nations  of  the  earth  shall  be  blessed  in  him  ?  For  I 
know  him  that  he  tvill  command  his  children  and  his 
household  after  him,  and  they  shall  keep  the  ivay  of  the 
Lord,  to  do  justice  and  judgment ;  that  the  Lord  may 
bring  upon  Abraham  that  which  he  hath  spoken  of  him.''' 
Gen.  xviii.  17,  19.  To  Israel,  through  Moses,  he  said, 
"And  these  words  which  I  command  thee  this  day,  shall 
be  in  thy  heart :  And  thou  shalt  teach  them  diligently 
to  thy  childre7i,  and  shalt  talk  of  them  when  thou  sittest 
,  in  thy  house,  and  ivheii  thou  walkest  by  the  way,  and 
ivhen  thou  liest  doivn,  and  tvJien  thou  risest  up.  And 
thou  shalt  bind  them  for  a  sign  upon  thy  hand,  and 
they    shall    be    as   frontlets   between  thy   eyes.      And 


FAITHFUL  TRAINING  OF  CHILDREN.  275 

thou  shalt  "write  them  upon  the  posts  of  thy  house, 
and  on  thj  gates."  Deut.  vi.  6.  Again,  through 
Solomon,  ""Train  up  a  child  in  the  way  he  should  go, 
and  ivhen  he  is  old  he  will  not  depart  from  it.''  Prov. 
xxii.  6.  And  yet  again  by  St.  Paul,  "And  ye  fathers, 
provoke  not  your  children  to  ^vrath :  but  bring  them  up 
in  the  nurture  and  admonition  of  the  Lord.''  Eph.  v.  4, 
etc.  Thus  we  see  there  is  want  neither  of  authority  nor 
of  information  on  this  important  duty.  Its  faithful  ob- 
servance brought  peculiar  favors  to  Abraham ;  it  was 
most  carefully  inculcated  under  Moses,  and  afterwards 
by  Solomon.  St.  Paul  continues  it,  admonishes  fathers 
to  avoid  the  error,  into  which  many  fall,  of  too  much 
rigor  in  their  discipline,  and  the  provoking  of  the  worst 
feelings  of  their  nature,  instead  of  the  best.  That  they 
should  bring  them  up  in  the  spirit  as  well  as  doctrines 
of  the  Lord  :  with  the  gentleness  and  kindness  of  Chris- 
tian nurture  ;  with  the  tenderness  and  love  of  the  prin- 
ciples which  they  inculcate ;  leading  them  onward  as 
the  foster  children  of  the  Saviour. 

And  if  all  Christians  would  take  heed  to  his  instruc- 
tions and  faithfully  perform  this  duty,  who  can  estimate 
the  result?  If  they  would  only  set  them,  first,  the 
worthy  example  of  a  Christian  life  and  spirit,  as  well  as 
teach  them  the  doctrines,  how  soon  would  disobedient 
children  be  melted  down  into  submission,  the  younger  ones 
kindly  taken  by  the  hand  of  the  older,  and  led  on  in  the 
ways  of  peace  and  holiness,  instead  of  mischief  and  ini- 
quity ?  The  discordant  family  become  united  in  bonds 
of  Christian  love ;  and  this  influence  spread  from  house 
to  house,  till  the  wilderness  would  rejoice  and  blossom 
as  the  rose. 


276  FAlTIirUL  TRAINING  OF  CHILDREN. 

If  parents  would  only  use  the  same  diligence  to  make 
their  children  Christians  and  ornaments  to  the  Church, 
which  thej  do  to  make   them   honest  and  worthy  mem- 
bers of  society,  what  a  change  would  soon   take  place  ! 
What  father  is  as  anxious  that  his   son   should  shine  in 
the  Church  as  in  the  world  ?  and  takes  the   same  pains 
to  impress   his   mind   with   the   truth,  that   sin   against. 
God  should  be  as  much  deprecated  as  sin  against  men  ? 
That  he  should  as  anxiously  avoid  the  disgrace  of  lying 
to   God,    as  that   of  being   called  a  liar   among  men  ? 
That  to  rob  God  is  as  great  a  sin  as  to  rob  men  ?    What 
mother  is  so  earnest  and  constant  to  make  her  daughter 
feel  the  importance  of  piety  to  God  as  to  be  respected 
in  the  society  in  which  she  moves  ?    to  infuse  into  her 
heart  the  principle  of  making  the  world  and  the  accom- 
plishment of  person  secondary  to  the  duties  of  religion  ? 
We  do  not   say  that  she  does  not  teach  this  doctrine  at 
times,  but  we  ask.  Where  are  the  mother  and  the  father 
that  show  at  all  times  the  same  interest,  and  are  as  con- 
stant in  their  eflorts,  and  are  as  anxious  to  impress  their 
children  with  the  belief  that  it  is  even  more  important  to 
"  seek  the  kingdom  of  God  and  his  righteousness,"  than 
to  seek  the  things  that  are  needful  to  the  body,  and  to 
their  fair  reputation  in  the  world  ?     When  parents  shall 
act  consistently  in  these  things,  and  make  their  children 
see  and  feel   that   such  is  their  faith  and  the  object  of 
their   efforts,  we   may   expect  a  great   change   to  take 
place  in   the   spirit  and  feelings  of  their   children,  and 
"  the  word  of  the  Lord  to  have  free  course  and  be  glo- 
rified." 

But  the  greater  portion  of  the  children  baptized  into 


FAITHFUL  TRAINING  OF  CHILDREN.  277 

the  Church  at  the  present  day,  receive  but  little  more 
instruction  than  to  learn  their  Catechism  as  a  task,  and 
attend  upon  the  imperfect  instruction  imparted  in  the 
Sunday  school !     And,   as   soon   as  old   enough  to  be 
sent  away  from  home  to  school,  the  great   question  is 
not  concerning  the  welfare  to  their  souls,  but,  simply, 
where   can  they  get  the  best  education  at  the  cheapest 
rate  ?    or,  in  what  way  can  they  be  prepared  to  shine 
most  in  the  world  ?    Their  immortal  interest  is  lost  sight 
of,  or  made  a  secondary  question,  of  minor  importance  ! 
Better  for  such  parents  they  never  had  a  child,  and  bet- 
ter for  such  children  if  given  up  to  others,  who  would 
do  them  more  justice.     Education  for  this  world  is  very 
important,  but  for  the  next,  more   so.     Nor   will   they 
ever  conflict,  when  rightly  understood  and  appreciated. 
The  child  should  be  taught  to  repeat  its  little  prayers, 
night  and  morning,  as  soon  as  able  to  lisp  the  name  of 
Jesus.     His  love  should  be  the  theme  of  conversation, 
when  rising  up  and  lying  down,   when  sitting  in  thy 
house,  and  by  the  wayside.     The  Catechism  should  be 
taught   as  a  thing  most  precious  and  cheering.     The 
Sunday-school  made  a  mere  auxiliary  to  aid  the  parent 
in  his  good  work,  as  confirmatory  of  his  weekly  instruc- 
tion.    It  can  never  be  made  a  substitute  for  parental 
duty.     It  is  too  imperfect ;    falls  far  too  short  of  the 
warmer,  gentle  and  full  flow  of  love  and  sentiment  that 
should  be  poured  out  from  the  parental  bosom.    Sunday- 
schools  were  designed  at  first  for  the  poor  and  neglected 
children  of  this  world,  to  supply  in  part  the  loss  such 
sustained  for  the  want  of  worthy  parents  to  do  justice 
to   their   souls    and    bodies.      They    were    afterwards 
24 


278  FAITHFUL  TRAINING  OF  CHILDREN. 

adopted  as  means  to  aid  others,  and  farther  than  this 
they  cannot  or  ought  not  to  go.  The  custom  of  some, 
in  leaving  for  the  Sunday-school  teacher  to  do  what 
they  ought  to  do  themselves,  and  sending  their  children 
to  the  Sunday-school  in  the  morning,  and  then  permit 
them  to  return  home  and  spend  the  hours  for  Divine 
service  in  the  streets  or  in  their  dwellings,  is  an  abuse 
of  the  Sunday-school  institution,  and  dangerous  perver- 
sion of  its  objects.  Above  all  things,  take  your  chil- 
dren to  church  as  soon  as  they  are  old  enough  to  remain 
in  comfort  throughout  the  services.  Let  no  institution 
or  custom  interfere  with  this  duly — better  keep  them 
from  the  school  than  from  the  public  worship  of  God's 
people.  The  evil  they  may  learn  in  your  absence,  and 
the  ruinous  habit  formed,  of  absenting  themselves  from 
Divine  worship,  more  than  counterbalance,  by  a  thou- 
sand fold,  what  they  gain  at  the  Sunday-school,  if  such 
is  to  be  the  case.  But  there  need  not  be,  and  ought 
not  to  be,  any  conflict  between  the  Sunday-school  and 
regular  attendance  at  church.  Both  may  be  attended 
with  great  benefit  where  there  is  the  will  and  proper 
arrangement. 

God  works  by  means,  and  has  committed  to  earthen 
vessels  the  glorious  light  of  the  Gospel  arid  the  great  work 
of  bringing  men  to  Christ  ^or  salvation.  Let  parents 
and  others  hQ  faithful  in  the  use  of  those  means,  and 
the  Holy  Spirit  will  bless  their  efforts  and  grant  them 
success.  If  we  are  faithful  in  our  part,  God  will  cer- 
tainly be  faithful  in  his.  The  means  granted  for  the 
spread  and  effectual  working  of  the  Gospel  of  Christ  are 
doubtless  abundantly  successful  to  the  end  for  which 


GREAT  BLESSINGS  IN  THE  END.  279 

tliey  were  ordained.  If  our  children  are  not  saved,  it 
will  not  be  because  no  provision  bas  been  made  for  them  in 
the  Redemption  of  Christ,  and  insufficient  means  grant- 
ed to  us  for  its  application ;  but  because  we  have  been 
unfaithful  in  their  use,  and  to  the  trust  committed  to 
us. 

And  when  men  shall  realize  their  responsibility,  and 
improve  the  means  given  them  for  their  own  and  the 
salvation  of  others,  then  shall  they  realize  the  promises 
of  God  to  their  own  souls  and  to  the  souls  of  their  chil- 
dren ;  then  shall  they  see  the  Gospel  of  Christ  begin  to 
work  in  the  fullness  of  its  power,  and  to  move  onward 
in  the  majesty  of  its  strengh  conquering  and  to  con- 
quer, till  "  the  kingdoms  of  this  world  shall  become  the 
kingdoms  of  our  Lord  and  his  Christ,"  and  the  glorious 
prediction  fulfilled  when  the  "  earth  shall  be  full  of  the 
knowledge  of  the  Lord  as  the  waters  cover  the  sea,"  and 
all  know  Him,  "from  the  least  to  the  greatest;"  whom 
to  know  is  life  eternal.     And  not  till  then. 


CHAPTER  IX. 


MODE  OE  MODES  OF  BAPTISM. 

Meaning  of  Words — Language  of  the  New  Testament — Septuagint  and 
Jewish  Customs — Divers  Baptisms — Water  of  Separation — Ritual  Purifi- 
cations— Oriental  Washing — Baptism  a  Generic  Term — John's  Baptism — 
Prophecies  of  Isaiah — Ezekiel — Malachi — Baptism  of  the  Holy  Ghost, 
poured  out,  shed  forth  or  fell  upon,  descended — Baptism  applied  to  the 
various  Ablutions  of  the  Ritual  Law — No  English  Word  will  supply  its 
place — Immersion  not  its  true  meaning — No  Mode  implied  in  the  Term — 
No  Specific  Directions  in  regard  to  it — Circumstances  of  each  case  must 
be  examined. 

The  mode  or  modes  of  baptism  is  a  secondary  ques- 
tion, which  we  did  not  design,  in  the  commencement  of 
this  work,  to  treat  of  at  alL  But  so  much  have  Bap- 
tists magnified  its  importance,  and  so  remarkable  are 
some  of  their  more  recent  movements  in  regard  to  it,  that 
some  notice  of  it  in  this  connection  may  not  be  out  of 
place.  Thej  have  formed  themselves  into  a  society  for 
the  translation  and  circulation  of  the  Bible  among  dif- 
ferent nations  of  the  earth,  and  in  these  translations 
they  render  the  words  "baptize"  and  "baptism"  into 
terms  which  mean  "immerse"  and  "immersion  !"  And 
they  openly  avow,  in  their  public  meetings,  that  "  the  na- 
tions of  the  earth  must  now  look  to  the  Baptist  denomina- 
tion ALONE  for  faithful  translations  of  the  Avord  of  God."* 

*  Bible  Society  Anniversary,  April  28th,  1840. 


TO  ASCERTAIN  MEANING  OF  WORDS.  281 

Out  of  this  movement  has  grown  the  ^' Bible  Union," 
formed  for  the  purpose  of  casting  discredit  upon  our 
venerable  English  Bible — so  long  the  source  of  light 
and  comfort  to  Christians,  and  by  which  so  many  thou- 
sands have  been  guided  in  their  way  to  glory ;  and  to 
substitute  in  its  place  another  version,  in  which,  among 
other  changes,  "baptize"  and  "baptism"  shall  be  ren- 
dered into  "  immerse"  and  "immersion!"  The  inevi- 
table tendency  of  such  things  must  be  to  undermine  the 
public  faith  in  the  truth  of  our  Holy  religion ! 

They  contend  that  the  Greek  words  Bapft^w,  baptize, 
and  Bartnafioi,  BAPTISM,  mean  "immerse"  and  "immer- 
sion," and  nothing  more  nor  less.  That  "baptize" 
carries  the  mode  in  the  name.  ^^That  it  is  a  specific  term, 
always  signifying  to  dip — never  expressing  anything 
hut  mode.''' "^  On  this  simple  z'sswe,  that  to  "baptize" 
means  only  to  "dip  or  immerse,"  which  they  say  is  the 
same  thing,  and  is  a  specific  term  expressing  the  mode, 
is  based  the  wdiole  superstructure  of  the  high  claims 
and  weighty  responsibilities  here  assumed. 

The  whole  question  turns  on  baptize,  whether  it  be 
a  specific  term  confined  to  one  mode  of  action,  or  a 
generic  term  like  purifying  and  cleansing,  which  implies 
an  end  that  may  be  attained  in  more  ways  than  one. 

Now,  can  it  be  proved  that  ^'baptize  and  baptism" 
mean  only  'Hmmerse  and  immersion?''  Do  dictionaries 
and  lexicographers  give  only  such  a  meaning  to  these 
words  ?  No — they  all,  ancient  and  modern,  give  differ- 
ent meanings  to  these  terms.  Gases — a  learned  Greek 
and  member  of  the  Greek  Church,  held  in  high  estima- 
*  Carson,  p.  79. 

24* 


282  TO  ASCERTAIN  MEANING  OF  WORDS. 

tion  by  his  countrymen,  and  whose  work  is  generally 
used  by  native  Greeks — gives  to  baptizo  the  following 
definitions  :  To  wet^  moisten^  hedetv,  to  wasJi,  to  bathe, 
to  draw,  to  pump  ivater.  He  uses  the  word  as  a  generic 
term,  including  under  it  Bof;^",  to  wet,  ^ouw,  to  wash, 
avt-kioi,  to  draw  water,  &c.*  Now,  as  a  native  Greek 
and  man  of  learning,  he  ought  to  know  something  of 
his  own  language.  And  Mr.  Carson,  a  leader  among 
modern  Baptist  writers,  admits  that  he  has  "all  the 
lexicographers  and  commentators  against  him."t  He 
attempts,  therefore,  to  go  behind  them,  and  seek  for 
the  meaning  of  these  words  in  the  ancient  Greek  clas- 
sics, written  hundreds  of  years  before  the  coming  of 
the  Saviour  to  our  earth. 

But  is  this  the  way  to  ascertain  the  meaning  of 
words  which  are  undergoing  changes,  and  may  be  used 
in  an  entirely  different  sense  in  one  age  from  what 
they  are  in  another  ?  What  does  the  English  word 
"prevent"  now  mean  ?  Answer,  "  To  hinder,  to  stop." 
What  did  it  mean  several  hundred  years  ago  ?  Answ^i*? 
"To  lead,  to  go  before,,  to  aid."  Shall  we  then  S^ 
back  several  hundred  years  to  ascertain  in  what  sense 
a  writer  of  the  present  century  uses  the  word  "  pre- 
vent ?"  If  we  do,  we  shall  give  the  very  opposite  of  its 
present  meaning,  and  say,  "prevent"  means  "to  go 
before  and  open  the  way,"  when  the  writer  means,  "  to 
hinder  and  stop  up  the  way." 

Again,  look  at  the  use  of  the  word  "provisions," 
at  different  times?  It  now  means  generally,  "food," 
"victuals,"  "something  to  eat;"    but  what  did  it  mean 

*  Ed.  Venice,  2  vols.  4to.  f  Carson  on  Baptism,  p.  55. 


TO.  ASCERTAIN  MEANING  OF  WORDS.  283 

in  the  time  of  Edward  III.  ?  Sir  William  Blackstone 
cites  the  following  illustration  of  the  principles  on  which 
laws  are  to  be  interpreted  :*  "A  law  of  Edward  III. 
forbids  all  ecclesiastics  to  purchase  provisions  at  Rome. 
The  law  (continues  he)  might  seem  to  prohibit  the  buy- 
ing of  grain  and  other  victuals ;  but  when  we  consider 
that  the  statute  was  made  to  suppress  the  usurpations 
of  the  Papal  See,  and  that  the  '  nominations  to  benefices 
by  the  Pope,'  were  called  'provisions,'  we  shall  see  that 
the  restraint  is  intended  to  be  laid  on  such  provisions 
only."  Provisions^  under  the  "  canon  law"  of  that  age, 
meant  "benefices  from  the  Pope;"  now  they  mean 
"food  and  sustenance  to  the  body."  Shall  we  go  back 
to  Edward's  time  to  learn  the  meaning  of  ^provisions  at 
the  present  time?  or  for  the  present  use  o^ p>reve7it,  and 
many  other  like  terms  ?  And  is  such  the  rule  by  which 
we  are  to  settle  the  meaning  of  words  in  the  Holy 
Scriptures  ?  Does  Mr.  Carson  or  his  followers  suppose 
that  by  laying  aside  all  the  lexicographers,  and  going 
back  from  five  hundred  to  some  thousand  years  before  the 
coming  of  Christ,  they  can  settle  the  meaning  of  bap- 
Tizo  and  baptismos  in  his  day  ?  Nay,  they  may  look 
for  passages,  and  strain  metaphors,  and  change  ivet  into 
soak,  and  tinge  into  die,  -and  dip  into  plunge,  and  all 
into  immey^se,  and  find  at  last  that  all  their  work  was 
in  vain  !  for  words  used  so  long  afterwards,  may  have 
greatly  changed,  and  have  a  very  different  application. 

The   only  rule  that  can  be  relied  on  in  the  meaning 
of  words,  is   their   general   application   in  the  age   and 
country  in    Which   they   are   used.     Instead   of    going 
■^  Blackstone,  Introduction,  Sec.  ii.  iii. 


284     GREEK  TRANSLATION  OP  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

back  to  the  ancient  Greek  classics,  we  should  examine 
how  these  words  were  applied  by  those  who  wrote  but 
a  short  time  before,  and  after,  and  during  the  days,  of 
the  Apostles.  How  Josephus,  and  the  translators 
of  the  Old  Testament  into  Greek,  and  the  different 
writers  of  the  New  Testament,  and  those  who  lived  in 
the  next  age  after  them,  used  these  terms. 

Further,  words  often  obtain  a  sacred  as  well  as  jjrofane 
or  secular  use.  For  instance,  the  word  ^xx-k-^ma,  in  secular 
classical  use,  means  an  assembly,  however  disorderly  it 
may  be ;  but  in  its  '  sacred  use,  it  means  a  Church. 
The  word  n^to^vt^^oi,  Presbyter,  means  elder,  or  old  man, 
in  secular  use  ;  but  in  a  sacred  use,  an  officer,  or  ruler 
in  the  Church.  In  classical  Greek,  the  word  Ayysy.oj, 
Angel,  means  a  messenger ;  has  no  reference  to  a  spi- 
ritual being,  to  which  the  sacred  Scriptures  apply  it. 

Therefore,  in  endeavoring  to  ascertain  the  meaning 
of  Baptize  and  Baptism,  in  the  New  Testament,  we 
must  not  only  examine  their  use  at  the  time  in  which 
the  sacred  writers  wrote,  but  especially  their  sacred 
meaning  at  that  time.  This,  every  student  of  the  Bi- 
ble, and  every  other  scholar,  must  admit.  Why,  then, 
go  to  the  ancient  classic  Greek  to  know  how  Christ  and 
his  Apostles  used  the  word  for  baptism  ?  The  New 
Testament  is  not  written  in  what  is  called  "  Classic 
Greek."  It  is  in  what  has  been  denominated  the 
Greek  of  the  Synagogue — a  language  having  classical 
Greek  as  its  basis,  but  into  which  idioms  and  words  of 
other  tongues.  Eastern  and  Western,  had  been  intro- 
duced :  modes  of  thought  and  forms  of  speech  peculiar 
to  the  Chaldee  and  Hebrew  languages  interwoven  in  it. 


SEPTUAGINT  AND  JEWISH  CUSTOMS.  285 

Hence,  said  one  of  the  ablest  of  Biblical  scholars, 
*'  classical  use,  in  Greek  and  Latin,  is  not  only  some- 
times unavailing,  but  may  often  mislead  in  the  critical 
study  of  the  Holy  Scriptures."* 

The  New  Testament  was  written  by  men  who  thought 
and  spoke  the  Chaldaic  or  Syriac  tongues,  and  who  read, 
and  heard  in  their  schools  and  synagogues,  the  weekly 
lessons  from  the  Law  and  the  Prophets.  They  were, 
therefore,  familiar  with  the  Greek  into  which  the  Old 
Testament  Scriptures  had  been  translated,  which  trans- 
lation had  been  in  constant  use  long  before  Christ 
came,  and  doubtless  had  more  influence  on  their  use  of 
words  and  style  of  composition  than  any  and  perhaps 
everything  else. 

Hence  the  study  of  the  Septuagint,  in  connection 
with  the  laws  and  customs  of  the  age  of  the  Evangelists, 
are  the  chief  sources  whence  the  knowledge  of  the  use 
of  terms,  and  of  the  allusions  in  the  New  Testament, 
is  to  be  obtained.  We  might  as  well  go  to  Edward  III. 
for  the  meaning  of  "provisions,"  or  to  the  ancient 
Greeks  for  a  definition  of  "angel,"  as  to  the  Greek 
classics  for  the  right  use  of  the  language  of  the  New 
Testament. 

I.  Let  us  first  examine  baptize  and  baptism,  in  the 
connection  in  which  they  stand  in  the  sacred  writings, 
with  such  assistance  as  the  Old  Testament  and  Jewish 
customs  may  aiford  us,  and  if  that  be  not  sufficient,  then 
look  to  other  sources.  But  if  we  be  convinced  from 
these  alone,  tha^t  baptize  is  not  a  specific  term,  "signi- 

*  Campbell  on  the  New  Testament. 


286  SEPTUAGINT  AND  JEWISH  CUSTOMS. 

fying  always  to  dip,  and  never  expressing  anything  but 
mode,"  but  is  generic,  and  admits  of  different  modes, 
we  need  go  no  further.  For  if  it  be  found  not  specific, 
and  does  not  exclude  every  other  mode  but  dijJ^^ing, 
then  they  who  attempt  to  confine  it  to  that  one  mode  only, 
have  gone  beyond  what  is  written,  and  their  superstruc- 
ture tumbles  down. 

Now  if  there  be  but  one  mode,  and  that  ''to  dip," 
how  shall  we  understand  St.  Paul,  who  calls  the  various 
ablutions  and  purifications  of  the  Jewish  ritual  "divers 
baptisms?"  In  a  comparison  between  the  ritual  of 
the  first  testament  under  Moses,  and  that  of  establishing 
the  second,  under  Christ,  he  says : 

Heb.  ix.  9,  10.  "In  which  were  offered  both  gifts 
and  sacrifices,  that  could  not  make  him  that  did  the 
service  perfect,  as  pertaining  to  the  conscience ;  which 
stood  only  in  meats  and  drinks  and  divers  baptisms,* 
and  carnal  ordinances^  imposed  upon  them  till  the  time 
of  refo  rma  tio  ?i . " 

He  goes  on  further  to  enumerate  some  of  those  things 
to  which  he  refers,  so  that  there  can  be  no  misappre- 
hension in  regard  to  them — 

Ver.  13,  14.  "  For  if  the  blood  of  bulls  and  of  goats, 
and  the  ashes  of  a  heifer  sfrinMing  the  unclean^  sancti- 
fieth  to  the  inirifying  of  the  fleshy  how  much  more  shall 
the  blood  of  Christ.... purge  your  conscience  from  dead 
works  to  serve  the  living  God." 

*  Reads  "washings,"  in  our  English  version,  but  the  Greek  is  the 
same  used  for  baptism  everywhere  else. 


THE  WATERS  OF  SEPARATIOX.  287 

What  he  means  by  the  ^'purifymg  of  the  flesh," 
through  "  the  ashes  of  a  heifer  sprinkling  the  unclean," 
is  prescribed  in  Numbers  xix.  17,  18.  "  And  for  an 
unclean  person,  they  shall  take  of  the  ashes  of  the  burnt 
heifer  o^ purification  for  sin,  and  running  water  shall 
be  put  thereto  in  a  vessel ;  and  a  clean  person  shall 
sprinkle  it  upon  the  tent,  and  upon  all  the  vessels,  and 
upon  the  persons  that  were  there,  and  upon  him  that 
touched  a  bone,  or  one  slain,  or  one  dead,  or  a  grave." 
So  that  one  of  the  "baptisms"  referred  to  by  the  Apos- 
tle, is  evidently  the  sprinMing  of  ivater  and  ashes  over 
the  unclean,  for  their  purification  from  sin.  The  Jewish 
ritual  further  reads,  "  And  the  clean  person  shall  sprin- 
kle upon  the  unclean  on  the  third  day,  and  on  the 
seventh  day ;  and  on  the  seventh  day  he  shall  purify 
himself,  and  wash  his  clothes  and  bathe  himself  in  water, 
and  shall  be  clean  at  even.  But  the  man  that  shall  be 
unclean,  and  shall  not  purify  himself,  that  soul  shall  be 
cut  ofi"  from  among  the  congregation,  because  he  hath 
defiled  the  sanctuary  of  the  Lord :  the  water  of  separa- 
tion hath  not  been  sprinkled  upon  him;  he  is  unclean." 
Yers.  19,  20.  Here  are  two  ablutions  or  baptisms  spe- 
cified, one  for  the  person  sprinkling  the  water  and  ashes, 
and  the  other  for  him  whom  he  sprinkled.  Or,  if  you 
prefer  it,  the  same  person  was  both  sprinkled  with  "the 
water  of  separation,"  and  bathed  himself;  but  without 
the  sprinkling,  he  was  "unclean;"  this  was  an  essential 
part ;  if  "  the  water  of  separation  hath  not  been  sprin- 
kled upon  him,  he  is  unclean."  Read  the  whole 
chapter. 

Now  here  are  two  ablutions,  one  by  sprinkling,  and 


288  BAPTISMS  OF  THE  MOSAIC  RITUAL. 

the  other  bj  bathing,*  or  if  you  make  them  both  parts 
of  one  and  the  same,  the  sprinkling  is  an  essential  2^ ciTt^ 
the  most  essential,  according  to  the  words  of  the  ritual, 
for  it  is  repeated  several  times  that  "he  is  unclean," 
upon  whom  the  spy^iiihling  had  not  passed  on  the  third 
day  as  well  as  on  the  seventh.  So  that  change  and 
modify  it  in  every  form  possible,  sprinkling  is  one  of 
the  essential  forms  of  ablution  included  under  the  name 
of  baptisms  by  the  Apostle.  What  then  becomes  of  the 
position — "Baptism  always  signifies  to  dip,  never  ex- 
pressing anything  but  mode  1" 

Further,  the  Apostle  specifies  also  the  sprinkling  of 
the  blood  of  bulls  and  of  goats,  which  was  performed  by 
the  High  Priest  on  the  great  day  of  atonement  for  the 
sin  of  himself  and  the  people.  (Levit.  xvi.  3-15.)  And 
after  pointing  out  how  the  ritual  services  of  the  law,  in 
various  ways,  shadowed  forth  the  Priesthood  of  Christ, 
and  his  more  spiritual  dispensation,  he  adds : 

Vers.  19,  20,  21.  "When  Moses  had  spoken  every 
precept  to  all  the  people,  according  to  the  law,  he  took 
the  blood  of  calves  and  of  goats  with  water  and  scarlet 
wool  and  hyssop,  and  sprinkled  both  the  book  and  all 
the  people,  saying.  This  is  the  blood  of  the  Testament, 
which  God  hath  enjoined  unto  you.  Moreover,  he 
sprinkled  likewise  ivith  blood  both  the  tabernacle  and 
all  the  vessels  of  the  ministry.'' 

The  people,  tabernacle,  and  sacred  vessels,  were  all 
purified  by  the  sprinkling  of  water  and  blood  upon  them. 

*  Not  by  immersion,  but  by  ''  washing." 


BAPTISMS  OF  THE  MOSAIC  RITUAL.  289 

And  this  is  another  of  the  "  divers  baptisms"  mentioned 
by  St.  Paul,  as  the  connection  most  clearly  proves,  and 
yet  it  was  not  hy  {mmersion,  but  by  sprinkling.  Nev- 
ertheless, according  to  our  Baptist  friends,  ''baptism  is 
a  S2)ecijic  term^  always  ^igmiymg  immersion!''' 

Again,  another  of  these  "divers  baptisms,"  included 
by  the  Apostle,  reads,  Numbs,  viii.  7,  "And  this  shalt 
thou  do  unto  them  to  cleanse  them,"  (i.  e.  to  prepare 
the  Levites  for  the  functions  of  their  office,)  ''''sprinkle 
water  of  purifying  upon  them,  and  let  them  shave  all 
their  flesh,  and  let  them  wash  their  clothes,  and  so  make 
themselves  clean." 

And  yet  another — for  Priests  going  into  the  taber- 
nacle to  perform  service  : 

ExoD.  XXX.  18,  20.  "  Thou  shalt  make  a  laver  of 
brass,  and  his  foot  also  of  brass,  to  wash  withal ;  and 
thou  shalt  put  it  between  the  congregation  and  the  altar, 
and  thou  shalt  put  water  therein,  for  Aaron  and  his  sons 
shall  wash  their  hands  and  their  feet  thereat;"^  when 
they  go  into  the  tabernacle  of  the  congregation,  they 
shall  wash  with  water,  that  they  die  not ;  when  they 
come  near  to  the  altar  to  minister,  to  burn  ofifering  made 
by  fire  unto  the  Lord." 

For  various  other  purifications,  is  prescribed  "  wash- 
ing of  body  and  clothes,"  "  sprinkling  with  the  water 
of  separation,"  with   "blood  and  oil,"   "shaving  head 

*  This  washing  was  performed  by  the  water  pouring  upon  the 
hands  and  feet  by  passing  through  a  small  cock  or  spout  from  the 
laver  above  into  the  broad  foot  of  brass  below.  See  various  com- 
mentators. 

25     ' 


290         BAPTISM  OF  CUPS,  POTS,  BRAZEN  VESSELS. 

and  face,"  etc.  etc.  (Levit.  xi.  xiv.  xv.  xvii. ;  Numb.  xix. 
xxxi.  &c.)  Were  all  these  performed  bj  one  mode,  and 
that  bj  "immersion  ?"  If  not,  is  baptism  then  a  " specific 
term,  always  signifying  an  immersion,"  or  is  it  generic, 
like  purification,  including  different  modes  ?  If  St. 
Paul  knew  its  meaning,  and  embraced  "  sprinkling," 
"washing,"  and  the  various  ablutions  for  purification 
prescribed  in  the  Mosaic  ritual,  under  that  name,  what 
shall  we  say  of  the  assumption  of  those  who  confine  it 
to  immersion  alone,  and  teach  others  that  it  never  means 
anything  else  ? 

11.  Turn  now  to  another  inspired  writer,  and  see 
how  he  uses  the  term  Baptism  : 

St.  Mark  vii.  4.  "And  when  they  came  from  the 
market,  except  they  baptize,*  they  eat  not.  And  many 
other  things  there  be,  which  they  have  received  to  hold, 
as  the  BAPTISMS'^  of  ciqjs  and  of  pots,  brazen  vessels,  and 
of  tables.'' 

Were  all  these  plunged  under  the  water  ?  (for  this,  we 
are  informed,  is  also  the  meaning  of  immersion.)  Tables 
(K?itiw)  twenty  feet  long  and  four  feet  wide  and  high? 
Or  couches  large  enough  to  accommodate  several  persons 
to  recline  upon  at  meals,  and  often  fastened  to  the 
wall?  Were  these  carried  to  some  place  to  plunge 
them  under  the  water  ?  Their  brass  kettles  and  cooking 
utensils  all  purified  in  the  same  way  ?  Were  all  the 
people   in  that  comparatively  rude  age,  prepared  and 

*  In  the  original  Greek,  "  baptize"  and  "  baptisms" — the  same 
words  which  Baptists  confine  to  immersion. 


BAPTISM  OF   CUPS,  POTS,  BRAZEN  VESSELS.         291 

able  to  perforin  such  ablutions  ?     Let  common    sense 
answer.     Had  it  been  their  object  to  make  these  things 
clean  literally^  they   would  have   applied  the   water   to 
them,  and  not  them  to  the  water.     But  this  was  a  ritual 
cleansing^  a  ceremonial  purification ;    and  whence   de- 
rived ?     Need    any    one    doubt,  after  reading  the  Le- 
vitical  law  of  Moses   for   the  purification  of  tents,  and 
all   the   vessels    in    them,    as   well   as    persons    made 
unclean    in    certain   ways,   (Numbers   xix.   18,)   "And 
a  clean  person  shall  take  hyssop,  and  dip  it  in  the  water, 
and  sprhikle  it  upon  the  tent,  and  upon  all  the  vessels, 
(particularly  "  open"   ones,  loth  verse,)  and  upon  the 
persons  that  wore  them,  and  upon  him  that  toucheth  a 
bone,  or  one  slain,   or  one  dead,  or  a  grave?"     How 
easy  and  natural,  from  such  a  law  as  this,  of  a  house, 
and  washing  of  hands   after  going  to  market,   as  they 
might  perchance  be   defiled  by  the  touch  of  something 
impure.     But   purification  from   such  things   under  the 
ritual  law,  was  obtained  not  by  immersion,  but  by  "  the 
water  of  separation   sprinkled  upon  them."     And  how 
easily  could  they  sprinkle  their  couches  and  brazen  ves- 
sels, but   how  inconvenient — aye,  impossible    in    some 
cases — to   plunge   them    all    under    the    water.     How 
could    widows    and    families    without    male    members 
take   such  articles    to  a  bath,  if  they  had  one  ?     And 
did   it    ever    enter   the    brain   of    any   man   that    all 
the  poor  people  were  provided  with  such  luxuries   as 
a  large   and   convenient  bath  to   every  family  for  such 
purposes,  until  some  favorite  theory  suggested  it  ?     Or 
how  could  anyone  have  hit  on  the  device  that  the  heavy 
articles  might  have  been  taken  to  pieces,  unless  driven 
to  the  last  resort  in  a  weak  cause  ? 


292  WATER  POTS  FOR  PURIFYING. 

Instead  of  baths,  in  our  Lord's  day,  purifications  were 
performed  from  pots  and  pitchers.  St.  John  ii.  6.  "And 
there  were  set  there  six  tvater  jwts  of  stone,  after  the 
manner  of  the  jnirifying  of  the  Jeivs,  containing  two  or 
three  firkins  apiece."  These  water  pots  (i-Sptat)  were  the 
same  brought  by  the  woman  of  Samaria  to  Jacob's  well 
for  water.  (St.  John  iv.  28.)  The  same,  according  to 
the  Septuagint,  which  Kebecca  carried  on  h^r  shoulder, 
out  of  which  Abraham's  servant  drank,  (Gen.  xxiv.  15, 
18.)  And  which  Gideon  put  into  the  hands  of  his  army 
to  be  broken  in  pieces  with  the  blast  of  the  trumpets  to 
dismay  the  Midianites,  (Judges  vii.  15-19,)  and  which, 
in  the  English  version  of  our  Bibles  are  called  Pitchers. 
They  could  be  carried  "on  the  shoulder,"  or  "in  the 
hand." 

These  were  the  baths  used  for  purifying  by  the  great 
body  of  the  Jewish  nation,  in  our  Lord's  day.  Did  they 
plunge  their  brazen  vessels  and  couches  in  them  ?  Ad- 
mit that  those  used  at  the  wedding  in  Cana  were  of  the 
largest  size  of  such  pots  or  pitchers,  and  that  they  held, 
as  some  have  estimated,  half  or  two-thirds  of  a  barrel  of 
water,  were  they  of  the  form,  or  did  any  one  of  them 
hold  water  enough  to  plunge  a  man  or  a  couch  under  ? 
No.  But  they  contained  enough  for  all  the  purposes 
of  a  large  wedding,  and  for  any  ritual  services  that 
might  be  required  in  the  usual  way  on  such  occasions. 
Remember  the  washing  of  hands  is  also  called  baptism, 
in  connection  with  the  '•'baptisms  of  cups  and  of  pots, 
brazen  vessels,  and  tables."  The  subject  was  thus  intro- 
duced, Mark  vii.  1-4:  "Then  came  together  unto  him 
the  Pharisees  and  certain  of  the  scribes,  which  came 
from  Jerusalem.     And  when   they  saw   certain  of  his 


WASHING  OF  HANDS  CALLED  BAPTLSM.  293 

disciples  eat  bread  with  defiled  [that  is  to  say,  with  un- 
washen]  hands,  they  found  fault.  For  the  Pharisees, 
and  all  the  Jews,  except  they  ivasJi  (vt^wr/rat)  their  hands 
oft,  eat  not,  holding  the  tradition  of  the  elders.  And 
when  they  come  from  the  market,  unless  they  baptize 
(Ba7tri.'(ywvrat)^  they  eat  not.  And  many  other  things  there 
be,  which  they  have  received  to  hold,  as  the  BAPTiSMsf 
of  cups  and  of  pots,  brazen  vessels  and  tables,"  or 
couches. 

Here  we  see  baptize  (BaTtrtcrwvfat)  and  tvash  (yl-i^ou>vtaC) 
are  used  interchangeably  for  the  same  thing,  and  both  ap- 
plied to  the  washing  of  hands.  That  the  baptism,  on  return 
from  market,  refers  to  ivashing  of  hands,  is  confirmed  by 
St.  Luke  xi.  37,  38 :  "And  he  [Jesus]  went  in  and  sat 
down  to  meat;  and  when  the  Pharisee  saw  it,  he  mar- 
velled that  he  had  not  first  baptized  (E^aartfto^)?)!  before 
dinner."  Compare  this  with  St.  Mark:  "For  the 
Pharisees  and  all  the  Jews,  except  they  ivash  their  hands 
oft,  EAT  NOT."  Washing  of  hands  is,  therefore,  a  bap- 
tism ;  and  yet  bajjtism  is  a  specific  term,  never  signifying 
anything  but  mode,  according  to  the  Baptists,  whilst  it 
is  used  in  the  New  Testament  as  synonymous  with  an- 
other word,  which  is  as  general  in  its  application  as 
the  English  word  for  "washing;"  and  used  in  this 
place  for  washing  the  hands  and  feet,  as  well  as  cups, 
pots,  brazen  vessels,  and  couches. 

But  our  opponents  are  determined  not  to  be  foiled ; 
they  will   suppose   heavy  articles  were  taken  to  pieces  ; 

*  Translated  "washing,"  in  our  English  version,  but  the  same  word 
for  baptize,  under  discussion. 

f  Original  word  for  baptisms.     %  Original  word  for  baptized. 

25* 


294  WASHING  OF  HANDS  CALLED  BAPTISM. 

and  that  the  hands  of  the  people  were  dipped  into  the 
water  to  wash  them,  and  this  was  the  baptism.  If  that 
be  true,  was  the  dipping  the  washing^  or  did  they  dip 
them  in  for  the  purpose  of  washing  ?  Was  not  putting 
the  hands  into  the  water,  merely  preparatory  to  the 
washing  ?  When  the  priest  dipped  his  finger  into  the 
blood,  to  sprinkle  it,  &c.,  or  the  hyssop  into  the  "  water 
of  separation,"  to  sprinkle  the  unclean,  was  the  "  dip- 
ping" or  the  "sprinkling"  the  purification?  But 
how  is  it  known  they  even  dipped  their  hands  into  the 
water  ?  for  that  is  not  the  Oriental  mode  of  washing 
hands.  Travellers  inform  us  that  "  before  meals,  a  ser- 
vant comes  round  with  a  pitcher,  and  pours  water  on 
the  hands  of  those  about  to  eat,  or  they  are  otherwise 
cleansed  with  running  or  streaming  water."*  This 
corresponds  precisely  with  "Elisha  pouring  water  on 
the  hands  of  Elijah,"  (2  Kings  iii.  11,)  and  is  in  exact 
accordance  with  the  spirit  of  the  Levitical  law,  for  there, 
running  streams,  or  zvater  poured  out,  or  sprinkled, 
except  where  fountain  spits  afforded  great  abundance  of 
water,  is  almost  invariably  required.  (Lev.  xi.  xiv. ; 
Numb,  xix.)  Even  the  Oriental  bathing  at  the  present 
day  is  not  by  immersion,  but  by  throwing  water  over 
the  body  in  the  bath  by  an  attendant.  D'Ohsson  says, 
speaking  of  the  women's  baths  in  the  East,  "They 
scarcely  ever  immerse  their  bodies  in  the  tvater ;  the 
large  marble  urns,  which  are  in  the  form  of  bathing 
tubs,  are  for  invalids.  The  strictest  decency  is  ob- 
served." Denon,  describing  the  bath  of  the  men  in 
Egypt,   says,   "The  bather.. ..is  inundated  with  water, 

*  See  Hall  on  Baptism. 


BAPTISM  GENERIC,   NOT  SPECIFIC  TERM.  295 

ivJncJi  the  attendants  take  out  tuith  a  small  basin  andjoour 
over  Ms  hody.'"^  And  by  reference  to  the  ritual  law  of 
Moses,  we  find  that  neither  the  tei'm  used  for  dipping^ 
T\OY  washing  clothes^  is  employed  for  bathing  the  person  in 
water ;  but  a  word  of  more  general  application  than 
either.  In  the  same  ritual  and  same  passages  prescri- 
bing the  order  of  the  services,  (Numb.  xix.  18,  19,)  one 
word  is  used  for  dijjping  the  hyssop  in  water,  another 
for  washing  the  clothes  of  the  unclean,  and  still  another, 
different  from  both  of  the  former,  for  bathing  the  body 
in  water,  and  this  the  same  which  St.  John  applies  to  the 
washing  of  us  from  our  sins  in  the  blood  of  Christy  Rev. 
i.  5 :  ''  Unto  him  that  loved  us,  and  washed  ("KovaavtC)  us 
from  our  sins  in  his  own  blood."  The  leading  idea  of 
which  is  simply  purification,  or  symbol  of  cleansing. 

Baptism  seems  to  have  been  a  general  term,  applied 
to  all  the  ritual  ablutions  of  the  Jews,  whether  divine  or 
traditional.  For  our  examination  thus  far  shows  that 
instead  of  signifying  only  to  plunge  under  the  water, 
inspired  writers  of  the  New  Testament  apply  the  term 
to  "sprinkling"  persons  and  other  things,  with  the 
"water  of  separation,"  with  "blood  and  water,"  to 
"washing  the  body  and  clothes,"  "  pouring  water  on 
the  hands  and  feet"  before  divine  service,  the  purifica- 
tion "of  cups,  pots,  brazen  vessels,,  and  tables,"  and 
"washing  of  hands"  before  meals.  It  follows,  there- 
fore, that  it  is  not  a  specific  term  signifying  one  mode  of 
action  only,  but  generic,  including  various  modes,  and 
similar  in  its  application  to  the  term  purification. 

*  Taylor's  Facts  and  Evidences  on  Apostolic  Baptism. 


296     John's  baptism  ceremonial  purification. 

III.  And  let  us  examine,  in  the  next  place,  if  Puri- 
fication is  not  in  fact  the  leading  idea,  attached  to  the 
baptism  of  both  John  and  of  Christ  in  the  New  Test;v- 
ment,  rather  than  that  of  immersion?  When  John  the 
Baptist  entered  upon  his  mission,  he  proclaimed  himself 
as  one  going  before  to  prepare  the  way  for  another. 
He  called  upon  the  people  to  make  ready  for  the  coming 
of  the  kingdom  of  God — to  repent,  for  it  was  at  hand. 
And  to  all,  who  gave  ear  to  his  preaching,  he  adminis- 
tered the  rite  of  baptism,  as  an  outward  sign  of  their 
preparation — emblematical  of  the  cleansing  of  their 
hearts  and  lives  to  prepare  them  for  the  reception  of 
the  promised  Messiah.  He  at  the  same  time  called  upon 
those  who  came  to  his  baptism  to  "  bring  forth  fruits  meet 
for  repentance."  That  now  "also  the  axe  is  laid  unto 
the  root  of  the  trees  :  therefore,  every  tree  that  bringeth 
not  forth  good  fruit  is  hewn  down  and  cast  into  the  fire. 
I  indeed  baptize  with  water  unto  repentance ;  but  he 
that  Cometh  after  me  is  mightier  than  I,  whose  shoes  I 
am  not  worthy  to  bear ;  he  shall  baptize  you  with  the 
Holy  Ghost  and  with  fire."  (St.  Matt.  iii.  8-11.)  His 
baptism  shadowed  forth  the  baptism  of  the  Holy  Ghost, 
the  Divine  Sanctifier,  whose  enlightening  influence 
would  act  "  as  purifying  water,  to  wash  away  any  inter- 
nal pollutions,  and  as  a  refining  fire,  to  consume  all 
their  dross  and  the  remains  of  corrupt  nature."*  To 
which  he  added,  "  Whose  fan  is  in  his  hand ;  he  will 
thoroughly  purge  his  floor" — cleanse  or  purify  it — 
''and  gather  his  wheat  into  the  garner."  (Yer.  12.) 
Precisely  what  the   Prophet  had  foretold.     "  He  shall 

*  Tliouiiis  Scott. 


JOHN'S  BAPTISM  CEREMONIAL  PURIFICATION.       297 

sit  as  a  refiner  or  purifier  of  silver ;  and  he  shall  purify 
the  sons  of  Levi,  and  purge  [purify]  them  as  gold  and 
silver,  that  they  may  offer  unto  the  Lord  an  offering  in 
righteousness."  (Malachi  iii.  3.) 

That  such  was  John's  meaning,  and  that  he  and  his 
followers  regarded  his  baptism  as  a  ceremonial  purifica- 
tion is  confirmed  by  the  fact  that  when  a  question  about 
PURIFYING  had  arisen  between  his  disciples  and  the 
Jews,  he  treated  it  as  synonymous  with  baptism,  and  calls 
upon  them  to  bear  him  witness  that  he  had  from  the 
beginning  claimed  only  to  be  one  sent  before  the  Christ, 
to  prepare  his  way ;  and  that  Christ  must  increase 
whilst  he  must  decrease.  The  followers  of  the  Saviour 
evidently  were  now  baptizing  greater  numbers  than  John, 
which  had  evidently  given  rise  to  the  question.  See  the 
connection,  St.  John  iii.  22-30  :  '■'  After  these  things 
came  Jesus  and  his  disciples  into  the  land  of  Judea  ;  and 
there  he  tarried  with  them  and  baptized  ;  and  John 
was  also  baptizing  in  ^non,  near  to  Salim,  because 
there  was  much  water  there ;  and  they  came  and  were 
BAPTIZED.  For  John  was  not  yet  cast  into  prison. 
Then  there  arose  a  question  between  some  of  Johns  disci- 
ples and  the  Jeivs  about  purifying.  And  they  came 
unto  John  and  said  unto  him  :  Rabbi,  he  that  was  with 
thee  beyond  Jordan,  to  whom  thou  bearest  witness,  be- 
hold the  same  baptizeth,  and  all  men  come  unto  him. 
John  answered  and  said :  A  man  can  receive  nothing, 
except  it  be  given  him  from  heaven.  Ye  yourselves 
bear  me  witness  that  I  said,  I  am  not  the  Christ ;  but 
that  I  am  sent  before  him."  "  He  that  hath  the  bride  is 
the  bridegroom  ;  but  the  friend  of  the  bridegroom,  which 


298  BAPTISM  SUBSTANTIALLY  PURIFICATION. 

standeth  and  heareth  him,  rejoiceth  greatly  because  of 
the  bridegroom's  voice;  this  my  joy  therefore  is  fulfilled. 
He  must  increase,  but  I  must  decrease."  He  then  goes 
on  to  pass  further  encomiums  on  the  Saviour,  and  to 
speak  of  his  claims,  and  the  necessity  of  faith  in  him  for 
salvation.  He  did  not  encourage  any  feeling  of  rivalry, 
or  even  put  what  he  had  done  on  an  equality  with  what 
the  Saviour  was  doing.  But  mark,  the  question  was 
about  "purifying,"  and  John  answers  it  as  if  presented 
under  the  name  of  baptizing.  Whether  jealousy  had 
arisen  in  the  minds  of  some  because  greater  crowds 
were  coming  to  Christ  than  to  John,  or  whether  the 
baptism  of  one  was  esteemed  of  more  value  than  that  of 
the  other,  or  whether  it  was  a  question  on  ritual  lustra- 
tions p;enerally,  or  in  whatever  form  it  had  arisen, 
John  had  regarded  it  as  synonymous  with  his  baptism, 
and  admitted  that  he  must  decrease  and  the  Saviour 
increase. 

They  were  both  engaged  in  baptizing  at  that  time  in 
places  not  far  apart ;  a  question  arose  about  purifying; 
certain  disciples  of  John  came  to  him  :  "  Rabbi,  he  that 
was  with  thee  beyond  Jordan,  to  whom  thou  bearest  wit- 
ness, behold  the  same  baptizeth,  and  all  men  come  to 
him.''  "John  answered,  a  man  can  do  nothing,  except 
it  be  given  him  from  heaven."  Or,  Ave  must  submit  to 
God's  appointment.  "  Ye  yourselves  bear  me  witness 
that  I  said,  I  am  not  the  Christ,  but  that  I  am  sent  be- 
fore him.... He  must  increase,  but  I  must  decrease." 

Now  what  need  we  plainer  than  that  this  question  called 
"purifying,"  was  concerning  baptism?  When  John's 
remarks  concerning  the  Saviour  ended,  then  folloAVS,  (iv. 


PROPHECIES  FULFILLED  IN   JOHN  BAPTIST.         299 

chap.  1-3,)  "  When,  therefore,  the  Lord  knew  that  the 
Pharisees  had  heard  that  Jesus  made  and  baptized  more 
disciples  than  John,  (though  Jesus  himself  baptized  not, 
but  his  disciples,)  he  left  Judea  and  departed  again 
into  Galilee."  Why?  Because  he  was  afraid  to  divide 
their  persecution  against  John  ?  May  it  not  have  been, 
rather,  to  cut  off  their  influence  in  fomenting  party 
feeling  between  his  disciples  and  John's,  which  they  had 
excited,  perhaps,  in  the  first  instance  concerning  the 
baptism  of  John  and  himself?  Such  an  interpretation 
is  natural,  and  corresponds  with  the  whole  narrative. 
But  whatever  be  the  explanation  we  give  as  to  the  Sa- 
viour's removal  from  that  part  of  Judea  to  Galilee,  it 
must  be  obvious  to  every  intelligent  reader,  that  St.  John, 
the  writer,  the  disciples  who  came,  and  the  reply  of 
John  the  Baptist,  all  refer  to  "baptism  and  purifying" 
as  synonymous  terms.  Indeed,  John's  baptism  was 
doubtless  the  purifying  under  discussion.  St.  Mark 
calls  it  "the  laptism  of  repentance  for  the  remission  of 
sins,"  (chap.  i.  4;)  i.  e.  a  washing  or  purification  from 
sin.  St.  Luke  likewise  calls  it  "  the  baptism  of  repent- 
ance for  the  remission  of  sins,"  (chap.  iii.  3,)  emblem- 
atical of  the  same  cleansing  or  purifying. 

The  Jews  evidently  expected  some  ritual  lustration 
or  purification  when  their  Messiah  or  his  forerunner 
should  come — at  least,  showed  that  such  a  thing  did  not 
surprise  them.  For  instead  of  inquiring  into  the  na- 
ture and  meaning  of  John's  baptism,  they  first  ask  him 
if  he  was  the  Christ,  or  one  of  their  predicted  prophets  ? 
and  then  why  he  baptized,  if  not  one  of  them  ?  (St. 
John  i.   19-25.)     "And  this  is   the    record  of   John, 


300         PROPHECIES    FULFILLED  IN  JOHN  BAPTIST. 

when  the  Jews  sent  Priests  and  Levites  from  Jerusalem, 
to  ask  him,  who  art  thou  ?  And  he  confessed,  and  de- 
nied not :  but  confessed  I  am  not  the  Christ.  And 
they  asked  him  what  then  ?  Art  thou  Elias  ?  And 
he  saith,  I  am  not.  Art  thou  that  Prophet  ?  And  he 
answered,  no.  Then  said  they  unto  him,  who  art  thou? 
that  we  may  give  an  answer  to  them  that  sent  us.  What 
sayest  thou  of  thyself  ?  He  said,  I  am  the  voice  of  one 
crying  in  the  wilderness.  Make  strait  the  way  of  the 
Lord,  as  said  the  prophet  Esaias.  And  they  which  were 
sent  were  of  the  Pharisees.  And  they  asked  him.  Why 
haptizest  then  thou,  if  thou  be  not  that  Christ,  nor  Elias, 
neither  that  Prophet?" 

The  baptism  itself  caused  no  surprise,  but  that  John 
should  baptize  did,  if  not  one  of  such  note  as  would 
authorize  this  extra  purification.  John  was  the  prom- 
ised Elias,  and  forerunner  of  Christ,  but  not  Elijah 
himself,  whom  they  expected.  The  prophecies  on  which^ 
they  based  their  hopes  of  a  Saviour,  and  the  blessings 
that  would  follow,  which  would  be  ushered  in  by  a  spe- 
cial messenger  going  before  to  prepare 'the  way,  had 
induced  the  expectation  of  some  ritual  preparation,  or 
extra  purification  of  the  people,  from  this  forerunner. 
Isaiah,  pointing  to  Christ  and  his  reign  had  said,  in  the 
name  of  Jehovah,  (chap.  lii.  13-15,)  "  Behold  my  ser- 
vant shall  deal  prudently ;  he  shall  be  exalted  and 
extolled  very  high. ...so  shall  he  sprinkle  many  nations; 
the  kings  shall  shut  their  mouths  at  him  ;  for  that  which 
hath  not  been  told  them  shall  they  see ;  and  that  which 
they  had  not  heard  shall  they  consider."  Ezekiel, 
shadowing  forth  the  blessings  of  Christ's  reign,  and  its 


EMBLEMS  OF  JOHN'S  BAPTISM.  301 

influence  upon  the  hearts  of  his  people,  had,  in  the  same 
name,  made  known  unto  them,  (chap,  xxxvi.  25-29,) 
"Then  I  will  sprinkle  clean  water  upon  jou,  and  you 
shall  be  clean;  from  all  your  filthiness  and  from  all  your 
idols  will  I  cleanse  you.  A  new  heart  also  will  I  give 
you :  and  a  new  spirit  Avill  I  put  within  you ;  and  I  will 
take  away  the  stony  heart  out  of  your  flesh,  and  I  will  give 
you  a  heart  of  flesh.  And  I  will  put  my  spirit  within 
you,  and  cause  you  to  walk  in  my  statutes,  and  ye  shall 
keep  my  judgments  and  do  them.  And  ye  shall  dwell 
in  the  land  that  I  gave  your  fathers,  and  ye  shall  be  my 
people,  and  I  will  be  your  God."  Malachi  had  told  them 
how  their  Saviour  and  his  reign  would  be  introduced, 
(chap.  iii.  1—3,)  "  Behold,  I  will  send  my  messenger, 
and  he  shall  prepare  the  way  before  me !  and  the  Lord 
whom  ye  seek,  shall  suddenly  come  to  his  temple,  even 
the  messenger  of  the  covenant,  whom  ye  delight  in : 
behold,  he  shall  come,  saith  the  Lord  of  hosts.  But 
who  shall  abide  the  day  of  his  coming?  and  who  shall 
stand,  when  he  appeareth  ?  for  he  is  like  a  refiner's  fire, 
and  like  fuller's  soap :  And  shall  sit  as  a  refiner  and 
purifier  of  silver:  And  shall  jjt^itrif^  the  sons  of  Levi, 
and  purge  them  as  gold  and  silver,"  &c. 

With  such  prophecies  familiar  to  them,  and  the  Le- 
vitical  and  traditional  purifications  constantly  practiced 
among  them,  we  need  not  wonder  that  John  made  no 
further  explanation  of  his  baptism  than  its  shadowing 
forth  the  refining  and  purifying  influence  of  the  Holy 
Ghost.  (St.  Mark  i.  8.)  "  I  indeed  baptize  you  with 
water,  but  He  shall  baptize  you  with  the  Holy  Ghost." 
And  can  any  one  doubt  whether  the  baptism  of  the 
26 


302  EMBLEMS  OF  JOHN'S  BAPTISM. 

Holy  Ghost  sanctified  and  cleansed  the  hearts  of  men  ? 
When  the  Saviour  was  baptized,  the  Holy  Ghost  de- 
scended in  the  bodily  shape  of  a  dove  upon  him,  which 
was  to  John  the  witness  of  Christ's  Messiahship,  while 
in  all  ages  the  dove  has  been  the  emblem  of  innocence 
and  affection.  When  the  Apostles  were  baptized  by  the 
Holy  Ghost,  on  the  day  of  Pentecost,  cloven  tongues  of 
fire  sat  upon  them,  indicating  its  gifts  aindi  purifying 
influence. 

St.  Luke  iii.  21.  '^Now  when  all  the  people  were 
baptized,  it  came  to  pass  that  Jesus  being  also  bajjtized, 
and  praying,  the  Heaven  was  opened.  And  the  Holy 
Ghost  descended  in  a  bodily  shape  like  a  dove  upon  him, 
and  a  voice  came  from  heaven,  which  said,  Thou  art  my 
beloved  son  in  whom  I  am  well  pleased." 

St.  John  i.  32,  33.  ''And  John  bear  record,  saying, 
I  saw  the  Spirit  descending  from  heaven  like  a  dove, 
and  it  abode  upon  him.  And  I  knew  him  not,  but 
he  that  sent  me  to  baptize  with  water,  the  same 
said  unto  me,  upon  whom  thou  shalt  see  the  Spirit  de- 
scending and  remaining  on  him,  the  same  is  he  that 
haptizeth  with  the  Holy  Ghost." 

NoAV  had  John's  baptism  no  reference  in  his  own 
mind  to  the  baptism  of  the  Holy  Ghost  ?  And  if  it  had, 
was  its  office  and  end  dissimilar  or  similar  in  character  ? 
If  the  latter,  was  it  not  necessarily  a  rite  of  purification, 
signifying  the  washing  away  of  sin  on  repentance,  as 
preparatory  for  the  promised  Messiah  ?  Who  can  doubt 
it  ?  John's  baptism  was  not  Christian  baptism,  because 
it  was  not  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son, 


CHRIST  UNDER  THE  LAW  OF  MOSES.  303 

and  of  the  Holy  Ghost."     It  was  not  an  initiatory  rite 
into  any  Church,  because  he  did  not  found,  or  pretend 
to  be  a  founder,  of  a  Church  or  sect.     It  was  simply 
the  work  of  the  predicted  Messenger  sent  to  prepare  the 
way  for  the  coming  and  reception  of  Christ.     That  it 
was  not  Christian  baptism  is  farther  made  known  by  the 
fact  that  when  St.  Paul  found  certain  persons  at  Ephe- 
sus  who  had   received  John's  baptism,   he  re-baptized 
them  in  the  name  of  the  Trinity,  (Acts  xix.  1-5.)     Al- 
though "Jerusalem  and  all  Judea,  and  all  the  region 
round  about  Jordan,"  received  John's  baptism,  and  the 
disciples  of  Christ  before  his  crucifixion,  baptized  at  one 
time  even  greater  numbers  than  John,  we  find  that  on 
the  day  of  Pentecost,  the  whole  number   of   the  New 
Dispensation  was  only  one  hundred  and  twenty.     (Acts 
i.  5.)     Until  his   crucifixion,  Christ,   as  well  as  John, 
acted  under  and  recognized  the  authority  of  the  law  of 
Moses ;  he  was  circumcised  on  the  eighth  day,  brought 
to  the  temple  and  presented  to  the  Lord,  after  his  mo- 
ther's purification ;  attended  the  public  worship  of  the 
temple,  and  drove  from  its  hallowed  courts  the  money 
changers,  who  would  change  his  Father's  hojise  of  prayer 
into  a  den  of  thieves.     When   he   cleansed  a  leper,  he 
bid  him  "  go  and  show  thyself  unto  the  priest,  and  offer 
for  thy  cleansing,  according  as  Moses  commanded,  for  a 
testimony  unto  them,"  (Luke  v.  14.)     And  in  his  2:)ubUe 
teaching  to  the  multitude,  told  them,  "  The  scribes  and 
pharisees  sit  in  Moses'  seat :  All,  therefore,  whatsoever 
they  bid  you  observe,  that  observe  and  do ;  but  do  not 
ye  after  their  works;  for  they  say  and  do  not."    (Matt, 
xxiii.  2,  3.)     Almost  the  last  thing  that  he  did  before  he 


304  JOHN'S  BAPTISM  NOT  CHRISTIAN  BAPTISM. 

suiFered,  was  in  obedience  to  Moses,  to  observe  the  "pass- 
over."  (Matt.  xxvi.  17-25.)  But  here  ended  the  Old 
Dispensation. 

He  had  united  with  John  in  preparing  the  people  for 
the  New.  He  had  submitted  to  his  baptism,  not  because 
he  needed  repentance,  but  as  recognizing  John's  mission 
and  appointment  from  Heaven,  and  his  ritual  purifica- 
tion for  the  introduction  of  the  New  Dispensation,  and 
as  submitting  himself  also  to  all  Heaven's  regulations 
"under  the  law" — "to  fulfill  all  righteousness."  (Matt, 
iii.  15.)  And  it  may  be,  to  set  him  apart  for  his  priestly 
ofiice,  as  was  Aaron.  For  John's  baptism,  as  a  prepa- 
ration for  the  Gospel  of  Christ,  was  certainly  very  simi- 
lar to  the  purification  of  the  Israelites,  to  prepare  them 
for  the  reception  of  the  law  at  Mount  Sinai.  (See  Ex- 
odus xix.) 

It  was  necessary  that  Christ  should  become  subject  to 
'Hhe  law  in  all  things^  to  redeem  them  that  were  under  the 
law."  He  therefore  fulfilled  all  that  was  required  under 
the  first  Dispensation,  even  submitted  to  and  aided  in  the 
mission  of  John  the  Baptist  in  preparing  the  people 
generally — especially  his  chosen  Apostles  for  the  New 
Dispensation.  But  from  the  moment  he  rose  from  the 
grave,  a  new  order  of  things  commenced,  and  his  sub- 
mission to  the  Old  ended.  His  public  declaration  now 
is,  ^'Allpoiver  is  given  unto  me  in  Heaven  and  in  Earth, 
Go  ye,  therefore,  and  teach  all  nations,  baptizing  them 
in  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the 
Holy  ahostr  (Matt,  xxviii.  18,  19.)  Up  to  this  time 
all  was  under  Moses ;  henceforth  all  shall  be  under 
Christ.  The  baptism  of  John  was  therefore  simply  a  purl- 


BAPTISM  OF  THE  HOLY  GHOST.  305 

fication — under  the  Dispensation  of  Moses,  preparatory 
for  the  ushering  in  of  the  New  Dispensation  under 
Christ.  It  implied  uncleanness  through  sin,  and  sym- 
bolized the  purifying  and  renewing  influences  of  the 
Holy  Ghost.  And  this  the  Saviour  directed  his  Apos- 
tles to  wait  for  at  Jerusalem,  and  not  to  commence 
their  work  before  they  received  it ;  although  he  had 
continued  with  them  forty  days  after  his  resurrection, 
instructing  them  in  the  things  pertaining  to  his  king- 
dom. 

IV.  Now  did  ^'purifying,"  under  the  Mosaic  Dis- 
pensation, imply  only  one  mode  of  action  ?  And  is  the 
baptism  of  the  Holy  Ghost  represented  under  the  figure 
of  dipping  or  immersion  ?  The  various  modes  of  "  pu- 
rifying," under  the  ritual  law,  we  have  already  noticed. 
If  because  of  the  omnipresence  of  the  Spirit,  we  are  neces- 
sarily immersed  in  it,  then  it  is  hot  by  dipping  or  plun- 
ging, we  get  into  it ;  but  we  are  born  in  it,  and  grow  up 
in  it,  and  every  one  has  already  been  baptized  by  it. 
It  is  not  something  yet  to  be  done.  But  if  it  be  an 
act,  or  an  influence,  or  gift  to  men,  which  any  do  not 
yet  possess,  then  it  must  come  of  the  Spirit,  and  be 
applied  to  them.  How  this  application  is  made,  let  us 
see  what  the  Holy  Scriptures  teach.  Under  what  mode 
or  figures  do  they  represent  the  baptism  of  the  Holy 
Ghost  ?  The  Saviour,  when  about  to  leave  his  disciples, 
told  them  they  should  be  baptized  with  the  Holy  Ghost 
not  many  days  hence,  and  to  tarry  at  Jerusalem  till  this 
was  accomplished. 

Acts  ii.  1-4.     ''And  when  the  day  of  Pentecost  was 
26* 


306  BAPTISM  OF  THE  HOLY  GHOST — 

fully  come,  they  were  all  with  one  accord  in  one  place. 
And  suddenly  there  came  a  sound  from  heaven,  as  of  a 
mighty  rushing  wind,  and  it  filled  all  the  house  where 
they  were  sitting.  And  then  appeared  unto  them  clo- 
ven tongues,  like  as  of  fire,  and  it  sat  upon  each  of  them. 
And  they  were  all  filled  with  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  be- 
gan to  speak  with  other  tongues,  as  the  Spirit  gave  them 
utterance." 

St.  Peter  informed  the  multitude  that  came  together, 
that  this  baptism  was  the  fulfillment  of  the  prophecy 
of  Joel,  verses  16,  17,  18.  "  But  this  is  that  which  was 
spoken  by  the  prophet  Joel,  And  it  shall  come  to  pass 
in  the  last  days,  saith  God,  I  will  'pour  out  of  my  Spi- 
rit upon  all  flesh,  and  your  sons  and  your  daughters 
shall  prophesy,  and  your  young  men  shall  see  visions, 
and  your  old  men  shall  dream  dreams :  And  on  my 
servants  and  on  my  handmaidens,  I  will  pour  out,  in 
those    days,  of  my    Spirit ;    and    they    shall    prophe- 

Here  the  figure  used  expressive  of  the  mode  is  that  of 
pouring,  not  dipping.  "I  will  pour  out  of  my  Spirit." 
When  the  actual  baptism  took  place,  a  sound  came  from 
heaven  as  of  a  mighty  rushing  wind,  and  "  cloven 
tongues  of  fire  sat  upon  them,"  which  was  the  fulfill- 
ment of  the  prophecy,  "1  will  pour  out  of  my  Spirit," 
&c.  And  the  Apostle  goes  on  further  to  explain,  (vers. 
32,  33,)  "  This  Jesus  hath  God  raised  up,  whereof  we 
are  all  witnesses.  Therefore,  being  by  the  right  hand 
of  God  exalted,  and  having  received  of  the  Father  the 


POURED  OUT,  SHED  FORTH,  FALLEN  UPON.  307 

promise  of  the  Holy  Ghcst,  he  hath  shed  forth  this 
which  ye  now  see  and  hear." 

He  uses  in  this  place  the  figure  of  shedcliyig  forth^  as 
expressive  of  the  same  thing,  which  is  closely  allied  to 
"pouring." 

Again,  wdien  St.  Peter  was  preaching  to  Cornelius 
and  his  company,  St.  Luke  informs  us,  (Acts  x.  44-46,) 
"  While  Peter  yet  spake  these  words,  the  Holy  Ghost 
fell  on  all  them  which  heard  the  word.  And  they  of 
the  circumcision  which  believed  were  astonished,  as  many 
as  came  with  Peter,  because  that  on  the  Gentiles  also 
was  jjoured  out  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  For  they 
heard  them  speak  with  tongues  and  magnify  God."  So, 
St.  Luke  applies  both  "  shed"  and  "  pour"  to  those  same 
gifts  of  the  Holy  Ghost  received  on  the  day  of  Pentecost. 
"  For  they  heard  them  speak  with  tongues,"  &c.  St. 
Peter,  relating  this  event  on  his  return  to  Jerusalem, 
says,  (Acts  xi.  15,  16,)  "  And  as  I  began  to  speak,  the 
Holy  Ghost /ig?^  on  them,  as  on  us  at  the  beginning, 
[day  of  Pentecost.]  Then  I  remembered  the  word  of 
the  Lord,  how  that  he  said,  John  indeed  baptized  with 
water  ;  but  ye  shall  be  baptized  with  the  Holy  Ghost." 
(Acts  i.  5.)  Hence  he  regarded  this  as  another  fulfill- 
ment of  our  Lord's  promise  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and 
uses  the  figure  of  St.  Luke — "the  Holy  Ghost /eZ?  on 
them." 

In  another  place  he  speaks  of  "  the  Holy  Ghost  sent 
down  from  heaven,"  (1  Peter  i.  13.) 

St.  John  says,  "I  saw  the  Spirit  descending  from 
heaven  like  a  dove,  and  it  abode  upon  him."  (John  i. 
32.) 


308  IMMERSION  MIS-TRANSLATION  OF  BAPTISM. 

Thus  we  see  the  baptism  of  the  Holy  Ghost  is  de- 
scribed as  "poured  out,"  "shed  forth,"  "fallen  upon," 
"descending,"  and  "abiding  upon;"  and  yet  we  are 
told  that  baj^tize  "has  but  one  signification — it  always 
signifies  to  dip — never  expressing  anything  but  mode;" 
and  that  ^'baptism  always  implies  immersion!"  And 
with  this  idea,  the  "Bible  Union,"  as  they  call  them- 
selves, are  making  a  new  translation  of  our  English 
Bible,  in  which  immerse  and  immersion  are  to  be  sub- 
stituted for  "baptize"  and  "baptism  I" 
'  Besides,  pouring,  shedding  foi^th,  falling  upon,  de- 
scending and  abiding  upon,  we  have  seen  that  baptism 
is  applied  in  the  New  Testament  to  washing  of  hands 
and  feet,  cups,  pots,  brazen  vessels,  tables,  and  to  the 
various  purifications,  by  washing  and  sprinkling,  in 
the  ritual  law  of  Moses. 

No  English  word  will  express  its  full  meaning,  and 
therefore  the  translators  of  our  venerable  English  Bi- 
ble acted  wisely  in  leaving  it  untranslated,  merely 
Anglicising  the  Greek  into  bajjtize.  To  p)urify  would 
convey  more  nearly  its  full  meaning  than  any  other 
word,  perhaps,  in  our  language ;  but  that  would 
be  more  liable  to  abuse.  We  therefore  adopt  in  full 
the  words  of  an  author  who  has  lately  written  an  excel- 
lent book  on  this  branch  of  our  subject,  which  we  have 
met  with  since  this  work  went  to  press :  "  If  we  reject 
our  English  word  baptize — for  baptize  has  now  become 
truly  and  properly  an  English  word — and  attempt  to 
translate  the  Greek  baptizo,  we  should  translate  it  by 
the  word  purify,  and  not  immerse.  At  the  same  time 
we  remark  that  the   word  purify,  as  used  in  the  Old 


BAPTISM  IN  THE  CLOUD  AND  IN  THE  SEA.  309 

Testament,  is  used  in  a  sense  different  from  that  in  which 
it  is  used  in  common  conversation  and  in  the  English 
classics.  The  English  word  baptize,  in  its  common 
acceptation,  more  nearly  expresses  the  exact  idea  of  the 
Greek  haptizo  than  the  English  yf or d  purify  would. 
And  on  this  account,  we  would  greatly  prefer  to  see  our 
venerable  English  stand  'as  of  old.'  To  translate  the 
Greek  haptizo  in  the  Word  of  God,  by  the  English 
words  dip  or  immerse,  or  into  any  other  language  by 
words  corresponding  to  our  English  words  dip>  or  im- 
merse, is  to  mistranslate  the  AVord  of  God ;  not  simply 
to  make  an  allowable  variation  in  a  version  of  the 
Bible,  but  to  mistrmislate  the    Word  of  God.''* 

It  being  now  evident  to  every  attentive  reader  of 
these  pages  that  baptize  and  baptism  are  not  specific 
terms,  confined  to  one  mode  of  action  in  the  Holy  Scrip- 
tures, but  generic,  and  express  various  modes;  it  is 
unnecessary  to  dwell  any  longer  on  this  branch  of  the 
subject. 

We  might  have  referred  to  the  baptism  of  the  Israel- 
ites— "unto  Moses  in  the  cloud  and  in  the  sea,"  (1  Cor. 
X.  1,  2,) — concerning  which  strange  perversions  of  a 
plain  case  have  been  attempted  to  twist  it  into  immer- 
sion !  But,  after  all,  the  idea  of  immersion  in  Avater 
on  "  dry  ground"  is  difiicult  of  comprehension — espe- 
cially when  the  water  had  been  removed  out  of  the 
way  for  them  to  pass  on  "  dry  ground  through  the 
midst  of  the  sea."  That  they  were  sprinkled  by  a  mist 
from  the  cloud  and  sea,  and  therefore  baptized  by 
aspersion,  is  easily  understood.     The  Psalmist,  however, 

*  Armstrong  on  the  Doctrine  of  Baptisms. 


310       BAPTISM  BY  THE  DEWS  OF  HEAVEN. 

explains  it  clearly  enough,  (Ps.  Ixxvii.  16,  20,)  "The 
waters  saw  thee,  0  God,  the  waters  saw  thee ;  they 
were  afraid ;  the  depths  also  were  troubled.  The  elouds 
poured  out  water.... Thou  leddest  thy  people  like  a  flock 
by  the  hand  of  Moses  and  Aaron."  The  rain  which 
fell  from  the  clouds  before  they  reached  the  shore,  in 
advance,  it  may  be,  of  a  storm  that  accompanied  the 
closing  of  the  sea  on  the  Egyptians,  was  the  baptism 
which  the  Israelites  received ;  while  the  rushing  toge- 
ther of  the  waters,  covering  up  the  Egyptians,  literally 
immersed  them,  for  they  were  buried  in  the  Red  Sea. 
We  might  also  have  referred  to  the  washing  of  Naa- 
man,  the  leper,  in  the  river  Jordan,  (2  Kings  v.  14,) 
at  the  command  of  Elisha,  which  may  have  been  an 
immersion.  And  we  might  likewise  have  examined  the 
baptism  of  Nebuchadnezzar  by  the  dews  of  heaven,  in 
his  deranged  state,  (Dan.  v.  21.)  For  the  term  applied 
to  him  in  the  Septuagint  is  the  root  from  which  haptizo 
is  derived,  and  more  intensive  in  its  meaning.  Yet  it 
is  used  to  express  the  wetting  or  baptizing  of  one  by  the 
settling  down  of  the  dew  upon  him  at  night.  We 
should  hardly  conclude,  in  such  a  case,  that  he  was 
dipped  or  immersed  in  the  dew.  We  might  further 
have  referred  to  Christ's  allusion  to  his  own  sufferings 
under  the  figure  of  baptism,  (St.  Mark  x.  38,  39.) 
These  would  have  given  additional  illustrations  of  the 
various  applications  and  modes  of  baptism,  but  why 
multiply  cases  to  establish  what  has  been  already  proved 
to  the  satisfaction  of  every  attentive  reader — that  bap- 
tize and  haj^tism,  as  used  in  the  Holy  Scriptures  are  not 
specific  terms  signifying  only  one  mode,  but  are  applied 


BAPTISM  BY  THE  DEWS  OF  HEAVEN.       311 

to  various  modes.  If  Christian  baptism,  then,  was  ad- 
ministered in  one  particular  way,  and  that  way  designed 
to  be  binding  on  all  generations,  we  must  look  to  the 
circumstances  under  which  it  was  administered  in  the 
cases  recorded  in  the  New  Testament^for  the  term  itself 
implies  no  ^mrticular  mode,  nor  have  we  any  specific 
directions  from  Christ  or  his  Apostles  on  that  point. 


CHAPTER  X. 


EXAMINATION  OF  THE    MEANING  AND    MODES  OF    BAPTISM 
CONTINUED. 

John's  Baptism — Prepositions  "in,"  "into,"  and  "out  of,"  determine  no- 
thing— JEuon  or  Springs — Apostles  baptized  without  regard  to  circum- 
stances— Baptism  of  three  thousand — of  the  Samaritans — of  the  Eunuch 
— of  Saul — of  Cornelius — of  the  Jailer — of  the  Disciples  at  Ephesus — 
Mode  indicated  only  by  the  Spirit — End  of  Baptism — Christ  the  second 
Adam — Circumcision  of  Christ — Figurative  allusions — Explanations — 
Summary  of  Scriptural  testimony — Concluded  with  historical  proof  of 
Baptism  by  different  modes  in  every  age  of  the  Church  since  the  death 
of  the  Apostles. 

We  now  proceed  to  examine  the  circumstances  under 
which  the  various  cases  of  baptism  recorded  in  the 
New  Testament  occurred.  And  in  order  to  make  our 
work  thorough,  we  will  take  up  every  passage*  that  can 
throw  any  light  on  the  mode,  from  the  beginning  of 
John's  baptism  to  the  end. 

But  we  must  first  premise  that  the  Greek  prepositions 
translated  "  in,"  "into,"  and  "out  of,"  prove  nothing 
of  themselves ;  because,  as  every  Greek  scholar  knows, 
they  as  often  mean  "unto,"  "to,"  "at,"  "nearby," 
"with,"  and  "from,"  and  are  so  translated  in  various 
places  in  the  New  Testament.  They  weigh  nothing, 
therefore,  as  ]?roof  for  one  side  or  the  other,  independ- 
ent of  the  verbs  and  other  things  with  which  they  stand 


BAPTISM  IN  OR  AT  JORDAN  NO  EXPLANATION.       313 

connected.  We  shall  find  that  in  every  passage  rendered 
"he  went  down  into  the  water,"  and  came  up  "ow^  of 
the  water^'"  the  sajne  terms  would  be  used  for  "going 
down  to  the  water,"  and  "coming  \x^ from  the  water." 
So  that  something  more  than  such  forms  of  speech  must 
be  found  to  justify  any  one  in  confining  baptism  to  the 
mode  of  dipping. 

The  first  passages  recorded  in  the  New  Testament, 
on  which  Baptists  rely  for  proof  of  immersion,  are 
found  in  Matt.  iii.  1,  5,  6:     "In  those  days  came  John 

the  baptist,  preaching  in  the  wilderness  of  Judea 

And  there  went  out  to  him  Jerusalem  and  all  Judea,  and 
all  the  region  round  about  Jordan,  and  were  bap- 
tized of  him  in  Jordan,  confessing  their  sins." 
They  lay  much  stress  on  "  baptized  of  him  in  the  Jor- 
dan;" but  the  Greek  sv  translated  "in,"  means  also 
at^  on,  hy,  near,  and  might  have  been  rendered  "a^  the 
Jordan,"  or  "by  the  Jordan;"  and,  therefore,  can  de- 
termine nothing  by  itself.  St.  Luke  uses  the  same 
preposition  to  point  out  the  position  of  the  tower  at  (^v) 
or  near  the  fountain  of  Siloam.  (Luke  xiii.  4.)  St. 
Paul  uses  the  same  frequently  in  describing  the  relation 
of  one  (sv)  at  or  7iear  the  right  hand  of  another.  (Heb. 
i.  3:  viii.  1:  Rom.  viii.  34.)  St.  John  uses  it  to  de- 
scribe the  light  shining  (sv)  on  one's  path.  (St.  John  xi. 
10.)  And  others,  in  like  manner.  Therefore,  we  must 
have  something  more  than  the  translation  of  sv  into  m, 
to  prove  anything  in  regard  to  the  mode  in  such  cases. 

Besides,  even  admitting  the  translation  to  be  correct, 
the   language  used  in  such   cases,  would   apply  equally 
well  to  persons   who,  with  wooden  sandals  and  short, 
2T 


314      BAPTISM  IN  OR  AT  JORDAN  NO  EXPLANATION. 

loose  robes,  in  a  sultry  climate,  would  as  soon  walk  a 
short  distance  into  the  water,  as  to  stop  at  its  edge,  even 
for  the  purpose  of  pouring  the  water  on  their  heads,  or 
of  sprinkling  it  over  them.  In  the  heat  and  dust  pro- 
duced by  crowds  under  such  circumstances,  it  would 
refresh  them,  and  wash  the  dust  from  their  feet  and 
sandals,  to  go  a  few  paces  into  the  stream :  whilst  John 
could  accompany  them  into  the  water,  or  baptize  them 
whilst  standing  himself  on  the  bank,  near  them,  as  we 
often  see  their  baptism  represented  in  ancient  engra- 
vings. Nothing,  therefore,  is  to  be  inferred  from  the 
rendering,  "were  baptized  in  Jordan." 

2.  Additional  stress,  however,  has  been  laid  on  the 
following  verses,  (13  and  14 :)  "  Then  cometh  Jesus 
from  Galilee  to  Jordan  unto  John,  to  be  baptized  of 
him.  And  Jesus,  when  he  was  baptized,  went  up  strait- 
way  out  of  the  water."  Here,  it  is  often  said,  "  went 
up  out  of  the  water"  shows  that  John  immersed  him. 
But  not  so;  the  preposition  o.7to,  translated  "  out  of,"  is 
more  generally  rendered  "from"  than  "out  of."  And 
so  far  as  that  is  concerned,  the  reading  would  be  equally 
correct  if  translated  "went  u-p  f7'om  the  water."  St. 
Matthew  so  uses  it  in  the  same  chapter  to  describe  flee- 
ing from  the  wrath  to  come,  (verse  7  :)  "  Oh,  genera- 
tion of  vipers,  who  hath  warned  you  to  flee  (aTto)  from 
the  wrath  to  come?" — not  "out  of"  the  wrath  to  come. 
Again,  he  applies  it  to  coming  down/rc>m  the  cross  of 
Christ,  chap,  xxvii.  40  :  "  If  thou  be  the  son  of  God, 
come  down  (p-no) frojn  the  cross," — not  "out  of"  the 
cross.  St.  Luke  applies  it  to  the  act  of  one  person 
leaving  another :    "And  it  came  to  pass  as  they  depart- 


KECORDS  OF  JOHN'S  BAPTISM.  315 

ed  {a.7io)  from  Mm,'' — not  '''out  of  him."  (St.  Luke  ix. 
33.)  Such  is  its  frequent  and  most  common  use  in  the 
New  Testament ;  therefore,  it  is  of  no  force  as  proof 
that  Christ  was  immersed  by  St.  John. 

And  even  its  present  rendering  applies  with  the  same 
force  to  one  who  had  walked  in  the  water  with  his 
wooden  sandals,  or  without  shoes  at  all,  (as  was  the 
case,  no  doubt,  with  many,)  to  receive  baptism  by  pour- 
ing or  sprinkling,  that  it  does  for  plunging  him  under 
the  water ;  therefore,  without  something  more  to  aid 
it,  proves  nothing  as  to  the  mode.  Adding  to  this  the 
fact  that  ''at  or  hy  the  Jordan,"  and  "from  the  water," 
may  be  equally  correct,  shows  that  any  argument  drawn 
from  such  sources  is  utterly  worthless. 

3.  St.  Mark's  account  of  John's  baptizing  in  or  at 
Jordan,  is  as  follows,  (Mark  i.  4,  5,  9,  10  :)  "  John  did 
baptize  in  the  wilderness,  and  preach  the  baptism  of 
repentance  for  the  remission  of  sins.  And  there  went 
out  unto  him  all  the  land  of  Judea,  and  they  of  Jerusa- 
lem, and  were  baptized  of  him  in  the  river  Jordan,  con- 
fessing their  sins.  .  .  .  And  it  came  to  pass  in  those  days, 
that  Jesus  came  from  Nazareth  to  Galilee,  and  was  bap- 
tized of  John  in  Jordan.  And  straightway  coming  up  out 
of  the  water,  he  saw  the  heavens  opened,  and  the  Spirit, 
like  a  dove,  descended  upon  him." 

Here  we  have  precisely  the  same  terms  applied  to  the 
act  of  baptizing,  that  are  used  by  St.  Matthew,  except 
in  the  baptism  of  Christ,  where  its  is  used  instead  of 
sv,  and  is  used  perhaps  in  a  hundred  places  in  the  New 
Testament  to  express  proximity  or  nearness  to  a  place — 
for  at,  to,  hy,   on,   upon,   and  near    to.     For   instance, 


316  RECORDS  OF   JOHN'S  BAPTISM. 

"his  fellow  servant  fell  down  (ft?)  at  his  feet," — not  in 
his  feet.  (St.  Matt,  xviii.17.)  Again,  "Seeing  the  multi- 
tudes, he  went  up  (^tv)  on  the  mountain," — not  in  the 
mountain.  (St.  Matt.  v.  1.)  Again,  "  He  gave  command- 
ment to  depart  ("0  unto  the  other  side," — not  in  the 
other  side.  (St.  Matt.  viii.  18.)  Once  more :  "  So  thej  ran 
both  together,  and  that  other  disciple  did  outrun  Peter, 
and  came  first  (ft?)  to  the  sepulchre," — not  in  or  into 
the  sepulchre,  for  we  are  told  that  the  "other  disciple" 
did  not  go  into  the  sepulchre  at  all.    (St.  John  xx.) 

Thus  St.  Mark  records  nothing  that  throws  any  ad- 
ditional light  on  the  account  given  by  St.  Matthew,  or 
on  the  7node  of  baptism  by  John. 

4.  We  come  next  to  St.  Luke.  All  that  he  says 
on  the  subject  is,  "And  he  (John)  came  into  all  the 
country  about  Jordan,  preaching  the  baptism  of  repent- 
ance for  the  remission  of  sins. ...Now  when  the  people 
were  baptized,  it  came  to  pass  that  Jesus  also  being  bap- 
tized, and  praying,  the  heaven  was  opened,  and  the  Holy 
Ghost  descended  in  a  bodily  shape,  like  a  dove,  upon 
him,"  &c.  (St.  Luke  iii.  3-21.) 

He  says  nothing  about ^ozV?^  into  or  coming  "out  of" 
the  water,  but  simply  informs  us  that  all  the  people  in 
the  country  about  Jordan  were  baptized  of  John,  and 
that  Christ  being  baptized  also,  while  in  prayer,  the 
Holy  Ghost,  in  the  shape  of  a  dove,  descended  upon 
him. 

5.  St.  John  is  the  only  remaining  witness  whose  tes- 
timony can  throw  any  light  on  this  question.  He, 
after  recording  the  answer  of  John  to  the  Pharisees 
who  were  sent  to  inquire  who  John  was,  and  by  what 


John's  sojourn  at  ^non.  317 

authority  he  baptized,  tells  us,  "Those  things  were 
done  in  Bethabara  beyond  Jordan,  where  John  was 
baptizing."  (St.  John  i.  28.)  Again,  "And  John  also 
was  baptizing  in  (or  at)  ^non,  near  to  Salim,  be- 
cause there  was  much  [many  waters]  water  there." 
(Chap.  'iii.  23.)  "And  he  [Jesus]  went  away  again 
beyond  Jordan,  unto  the  place  where  John  at  first  bap- 
tized." (Chap.  X.  40.) 

The  advocates  of  immersion  have  drawn  largely  from 
the  clause,  "because  there  was  much  water  there," 
urging  that  immersion  required  much  water,  and  for 
that  especial  reason  John  sojourned  at  ^non,  a  place 
of  several  springs  or  fountains  of  water.  But  abun- 
dance of  water,  for  drinking,  washing,  and  culinary 
purposes,  are  as  necessary  to  crowds  and  large  assem- 
blies in  a  wilderness,  or  uninhabited  portions  of  the 
country,  as  it  would  be  for  their  baptism  by  immersion. 
When  our  Methodist  brethren  purpose  holding  a  large 
camp  meeting,  abundance  of  good  spring  water  is 
regarded  as  a  very  important  item.  And  they  are  influ- 
enced in  their  selection  of  a  place  for  such  an  assem- 
blage more  perhaps  by  a  good  supply  of  water  than 
any  other  one  thing — not  because  of  immersion,  but 
for  the  necessary  use  and  comfort  of  their  assembly, 
-^non,  being  the  plural  of  fountain,  or  spring,  probably 
took  its  name  from  the  many  springs  or  fountains  there. 
And  this  agrees  with  the  Greek  v8ara  novka  '•^many  wa- 
ters,'' many  springs  or  fountains,  instead  of  much  water 
in  one  body.  And  the  passage  would  be  more  literally 
translated  if  rendered,  "And  John  also  was  baptizing 
at  ^non  (the   Springs)  near  to   Salim,   because  there 

27* 


318         iENON,  THE  SPRINGS  OR  MANY  FOUNTAINS. 

were  many  -waters  there,"  springs  or  fountains,  to  sup- 
ply all  the  wants  of  the  multitudes  that  flocked  to  his 
baptism.  He  would  hardly  have  left  the  Jordan  for 
^NON,  if  water  for  immersion  had  been  his  object. 
Yet  he  might  have  done  so  for  the  sake  of  purer  and 
cooler  water  to  slake  the  thirst  of  the  people,  and  for 
other  necessary  uses. 

The  question  has  been  triumphantly  asked,  ''Why 
did  John  baptize  in  the  river  ?  Why  did  he  go  down 
to  the  water  at  all — even  to  the  edge  of  the  water — if 
baptism  was  performed  by  pouring  or  sprinkling  ?  Why 
not  bring  the  water  from  the  river  to  the  people  to  bap- 
tize them?"  Such  questions  would  not  arise  if  the 
circumstances  of  the  case  were  rightly  pondered. 
Crow^ds  of  people  collected  together  to  see  and  hear 
something  new  outside  the  city  limits,  and  in  retired 
places,  do  not  often  take  with  them  vessels  for  carrying 
water.  John  did  not  select  the  city  for  his  operations ; 
had  he  done  so,  such  multitudes  must  have  blocked  up- 
the  streets,  and  excited  the  civil  authorities  against  his 
mission.  He  made  choice  of  more  open  and  retired 
places,  under  the  groves  and  along  the  banks  of  the 
Jordan.  It  was,  therefore,  an  easy  matter  to  step  down 
to  the  edge  of  the  water ;  it  would  even  be  more  con- 
venient for  taking  up  the  water  in  his  hand  to  pour 
upon  the  heads  of  his  numerous  converts.  For  it  must 
be  remembered  that  many  thousands  were  baptized  by 
him ;  while  we  have  no  right  to  suppose  that  articles 
for  such  purposes  would  be  very  abundant  in  assem- 
blages of  like  character  in  "the  wilderness."  (Judges 
vii.  5,  6.)     We  are  informed  that  "  all  Jerusalem  and 


NOTHING  DECISIVE  AS  TO  THE  MODE.  819 

all  Judea,  and  all  the  region  round  about  Jordan,"  re- 
ceived his  baptism.  And  if  one-twentieth  of  this  popu- 
lation, according  to  the  estimate  of  Josephus,  was 
baptized  by  immersion,  John  must  have  remained  in  the 
water  a  large  portion  of  each  day  during  his  whole  mis- 
sion. 

Such  interrogations,  therefore,  have  no  force  as  argu- 
ments against  baptism  by  aspersion  or  otherwise. 
Place  and  circumstances  show  that  stepping  down  to  or 
into  the  river,  would  be  a  natural  and  easy  way  to 
obtain  the  water  even  for  sprinkling  so  many ;  pre- 
eminently so,  since  John's  baptism  was  a  Jewish  imrifi- 
cation  for  the  reception  of  Christ ;  and  such  purifications 
generally  required  running  water.  Hence  the  propriety 
of  selecting  the  river  Jordan,  and  the  running  fountains 
or  streams  at  ^non,  as  suitable  places  for  both  the  rite 
and  the  necessary  comfort  of  the  people. 

It  must  now  be  clear  to  the  reader  that  nothing 
definite  in  regard  to  the  mode  can  be  learned  from 
John's  b'aptism.  We  have  examined  this  point,  not 
because  it  could  decide  the  mode  of  Christian  baptism, 
(for  we  have  already  shown  that  John's  baptism  was 
not  Christian  baptism,)  but  because  it  has  been  sup- 
posed that  whatever  mode  was  practiced  by  John  was 
adopted  by  the  Apostles.  This,  however,  does  not  ne- 
cessarily follow ;  and  if  it  did,  would  conflict  with  the 
theory  that  John  sought  places  of  much  ivater  for  the 
object  of  immersion ;  for  it  is  certain  no  such  intima- 
tion is  to  be  found  in  the  sacred  record,  for  the  purpose 
of  Christian  baptism.  On  the  contrary,  in  every  case, 
when  the  message  of  the  Apostles  was  received,  there 


320  BAPTISM  OF   THREE  THOUSAND. 

and  then  they  were  baptized.  The  three  thousand  on 
the  day  of  Pentecost,  in  the  city  of  Jerusalem — men 
and  women  by  Philip  in  Samaria — the  eunuch  by  the 
wayside — Paul  in  Damascus,  and  probably  in  the  room 
where  the  scales  fell  from  his  eyes — Cornelius  at  his 
own  house — Lydia  near  the  river  side — the  jailer  within 
the  prison  walls — the  disciples  at  Ephesus,  and  others 
besides,  without  one  word  in  regard  to  inconvenience 
or  delay,  or  removal  to  another  place  for  the  rite. 

II.  We  will  now  proceed  to  examine  every  instance 
of  Christian  Baptism  in  the  New  Testament  from 
which  an  inference  in  any  possible  way  can  be  made  to 
bear  on  the  mode  in  which  it  was  administered.  We 
begin  with  the  three  thousand  on  the  day  of  Pentecost. 
Having  received  the  baptism  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  the 
Apostles  entered  forthwith  upon  the  great  work  for 
which  they  had  been  set  apart.  The  people  collected 
in  large  numbers  to  hear  them,  and  many  were  made  to 
cry  out,  ^'  Men  and  brethren,  what  shall  we  do  ?" 

Acts  ii.  38,  39,  41.  ''  Then  Peter  said  unto  them, 
Repent,  and  be  baptized  every  one  of  you,  in  the  name 
of  Jesus  Christ,  for  the  remission  of  sins,  and  ye  shall 
receive  the  Holy  Ghost.  For  the  promise  is  unto  you, 
and  to  your  children,  and  to  all  that  are  afar  off,  even 
as  many  as  the  Lord  our  God  shall  call.... Then  they 
that  received  his  word  were  baptized ;  and  the  same 
day  there  were  added  unto  them  about  three  thousand 
souls." 

This  was  the  first  day's  work  of  the  Apostles  under 


BAPTISM  OF   THREE  THOUSAND.  321 

the  New  Dispensation.  Baptized  themselves  by  the 
Holy  Ghust,  and  three  thousand  souls  converted  by 
their  preaching,  and  then  baptized  by  them.  But  not 
a  single  thing  is  said  or  done,  so  far  as  the  record  goes, 
to  indicate  in  the  slightest  degree  that  they  were  bap- 
tized by  immersion.  Not  a  word  about  their  going  to 
river  or  pool  for  baptism ;  the  whole  transaction  is  record- 
ed as  if  they  were  baptized  as  soon  as  convinced  by 
the  preaching  of  the  Apostles,  and  they  ready  to  re- 
ceive them.  And  the  baptism  might  easily  have  been 
performed  in  a  short  time  from  the  contents  of  the 
watering  pots  kept  for  purifying ;  but  if  by  immersion, 
it  must  have  been  laborious  work  for  the  remainder  of 
that  day. 

Further,  it  was  at  a  season  of  the  year  when  the  little 
brook  Cedron  was  generally  dry ;  the  public  baths,  if 
any,  we  may  suppose  were  in  the  hands  of  those  in 
authority  ;  and  the  supposition  that  they  were  scattered 
through  the  city  to  find  private  baths  for  such  a  num- 
ber, would  hardly  correspond  with  the  time  allowed 
them,  and  purport  of  the  record.  The  only  mode  inti- 
mated is  that  of  the  baptism  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  under 
the  figure  of  "poured  out,"  (^IfA^??.)  Therefore,  so 
far  as  allusions  indicate  mode,  they  are  decidedly  in 
favor  of  pouring,  or  aspersion,  rather  than  immersion. 
So  much  for  the  baptism  of  the  three  thousand. 

We  come  next  to  the  baptism  of  the  people  of  Sa- 
maria. 

Acts  viii.  12,  13.  "But  when  they  believed  Philip, 
preaching   the  things   concerning  the  kingdom  of  God, 


322     NO  MODE  DEFINED  BY  THE  EUNUCH'S  BAPTISM. 

and  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ,  they  were  baptized,  both 

men  and  women.     Then   Simon  himself  believed  also ; 

and  when  he  was  baptized,  he  continued  with  Philip, 

and  wondered,  beholding  the  miracles  and  signs  which 

were  done." 

We  have  no  allusion  to  mode   here — consequently, 

nothing  to  favor  the  idea  of  immersion. 

III.  The  next  in  order  is  the  baptism  of  the  eunuch 
by  Philip.  The  eunuch,  while  riding  in  his  carriage, 
was  reading  the  prophecy  of  Isaiah,  and  invited  Philip, 
who  drew  near  to  him,  to  take  a  seat  with  him.  That 
portion  upon  which  he  was  engaged,  treated  of  the 
vicarious  sufferings  of  Christ,  which  is  embraced  in  the 
52d  and  53d  chapters  of  Isaiah,  (divisions  into  chap- 
ters had  not  then  been  made,)  and  asked  Philip  "  of 
whom  speaketh  the  Prophet  this?  of  himself,  or  of 
some  other  man  ?" 

Acts  viii.  35-39.  "  Then  Philip  opened  his  mouth, 
and  began  at  the  same  scripture,  and  preached  unto 
him  Jesus.  And  as  they  went  on  their  way,  they  came 
to  a  certain  water ;  and  the  eunuch  said.  See,  here  is 
water ;  what  doth  hinder  me  to  be  baptized  ?  And 
Philip  saith.  If  thou  believest  with  all  thine  heart,  thou 
mayest.  And  he  answered  and  said,  I  believe  that  Je- 
sus Christ  is  the  Son  of  God.  And  he  commanded  the 
chariot  to  stand  still ;  and  they  went  down  both  into  the 
water,  both  Philip  and  the  eunuch ;  and  he  baptized 
him.  And  when  they  were  come  up  out  of  the  water, 
the  Spirit   of   the  Lord   caught   away  Philip,  that   the 


CIRCUMSTANCES  UNFAVORABLE  TO  IMMERSION.     323 

eunuch  saw  him  no   more ;    and  he  went  on  his  way 
rejoicing." 

This  passage  has  been  regarded  by  some  persons  as 
ahuost  proof  positive  of  immersion.  But  the  very  same 
reasoning  applies  to  it  that  applies  to  the  baptism 
in  the  river  of  Jordan.  The  Greek  words  rendered 
"into"  and  "out  of,"  as  often  mean  "unto"  and 
"from."  And  if  translated,  "they  went  down  both 
to  the  water,"  and  were  "come  w^  from  the  water,"  it 
would  be  in  perfect  accordance  with  the  Greek  ;  and 
hence  proof  resting  upon  the  mere  translation  of  such 
words  amounts  to  nothing.  St.  Matthew  uses  the  same 
Greek  word  which  is  rendered  "into,"  in  this  place, 
when  he  says :  "Go  thou  (sts)  to  the  sea," — not  into  the 
sea.  (Chap.  xvii.  27.)  Also  for  "unto,"  in  the  passage, 
"  I  am  not  sent  but  (eis)  u7ito  the  lost  sheep  of  the  house 
of  Israel," — not  into  the  lost  sheep.  (Chap.  xv.  24.) 
Again:  "All  things  are  ready,  come  (si-s)  ujito  the  mar- 
riage,"— not  into  the  marriage.  (Chap.  xxii.  4.)  Thus 
it  will  be  perceived  how  uncertain  is  the  meaning  of  the 
phrase  "went  down  into  the  water."  And  equally  un- 
certain is  its  corresponding  one,  "come  up  out  of  the 
water."  St.  Matthew  uses  the  same  word  for  separating 
the  wicked  from  the  righteous.  "  Sever  the  wicked  (sx) 
from  among  the  just," — not  out  of  (Chap.  xiii.  49.) 
Again  :  "  The  tree  is  known  (ex)  from  or  bi/  its  fruit," — 
not  out  of  (Chap.  xii.  23.)  St.  John  uses  it  in  like 
manner :  "  Many  good  works  have  I  shown  you  {ex) 
from  my  Father," — not  out  of  mj  Father. 

Now  what  is  an  argument  worth  in  any  cause,  resting 


324    CIRCUMSTANCES  UNFAVORABLE  TO  IMMERSION. 

on  such  a  basis  as  tins  ?  The  verbs  with  which  these  pre- 
positions stand  connected,  accord  as  well  with  descend- 
ing from  the  chariot  to  the  water,  and  going  w^  from  the 
water  to  the  chariot,  as  descending  into  the  water,  and 
going  up  out  of  it.  And  even  admitting  that  they  went 
into  it,  would  not  prove  any  particular  mode  of  the  bap- 
tism, as  we  have  before  shown.  Besides  which,  there 
are  other  circumstances  that  seem  to  conflict  with  the 
idea  of  immersion.  There  is  no  river  or  water-course  of 
any  note  between  Jerusalem  and  Gaza,  where  they  were 
travelling — St.  Luke  calls  it  a  way  that  is  "desert." 
He  also  calls  the  place  of  the  baptism,  "a  certain 
water,"  as  if  so  inconsiderable  as  not  to  deserve  the 
name  of  river  or  pond  or  lake,  and  hence  it  was  pro- 
bably one  of  those  luay-side  wells,  which  travellers 
inform  us  are  to  be  found  sometimes  in  desert  coun- 
tries, provided  for  the  accommodation  and  lodging 
places  of  those  who  travel  through  that  way.  And 
such  being  the  case,  one  might  be  washed  or  sprinkled, 
when  plunging  him  under  the  water  would  be  imprac- 
ticable. It  must  be  remembered  also  that  travelling 
on  foot  as  Philip  was,  w^et  clothes  after  an  immersion, 
would  be  rather  inconvenient  to  carry;  or,  if  the  opera- 
tion was  performed  nude,  we  hope  that  we  shall  be 
excused  in  this  age,  if  we  depart  from  example  in  that 
particular. 

We  should  further  inquire  what  suggested  baptism  to 
the  mind  of  the  Eunuch,  that  he  should  propound  to 
Philip  the  question,  "  What  doth  hinder  me  to  be  bap- 
tized?" as  soon  as  he  saw  water.  By  turning  to  that 
portion  of  Isaiah  which  the   Eunuch  was  reading,  we 


NO  MODE  OF  BAPTISM  POINTED  OUT.  325 

shall  see  that  the  prophet,  among  the  first  things  after 
introducing  the  vicarious  sufferings  of  Christ,  says,  "So 
shall  he  sprinkle  many  nations."  (Hi.  15.)  If  Philip 
preached  to  him  baptism  from  these  words,  he  could 
hardly  have  preached  baptism  by  immersion.  There- 
fore, in  either  case,  the  probabilities  are  against,  rather 
than  in  favor  of  immersion. 

All  the  circumstances  considered,  the  condition  of 
travellers,  scarcity  of  water,  and  language  of  Isaiah — 
this  passage,  on  which  so  much  reliance  has  been  placed 
for  immersion,  and  which  Mr.  Carson  thinks,  under  the 
"  most  violent  persuasion  it  could  sustain  on  the  rack, 
would  still  cry  out,  immersion^  immersion,'''^  really 
proves  as  much  for  any  other  mode  as  for  immersion. 
No  logician  can  admit  that  it  proves  the  Eunuch  was 
plunged  .under  the  water.  And  this  is  all  that  we  are 
now  to  settle  concerning  it.  We  have  no  objection  to 
immersion  in  itself;  our  object  is  to  ascertain  whether 
it  was  the  mode  practiced  by  the  apostles,  and  whether 
we  can  find  any  authority  that  will  justify  us  in  con- 
fining baptism  to  that  one  mode  and  forbidding  all 
others.     This  we  have  certainly  failed  to  do  thus  far. 

4.  The  next  baptism  in  order  is  that  of  St.  Paul's. 
While  on  his  way  to  Damascus  as  a  persecutor  of  Chris- 
tians, he  was  struck  with  blindness,  and  removed  to  the 
house  of  a  friend,  where  he  remained  "  three  days  with- 
out sight,  and  neither  did  eat  nor  drink."  At  the  end 
of  which  time  Ananias  was  sent  to  him  to  open  his  eyes 
and  baptize  him. 

*  Carson  on  Baptism. 

28 


326  ^'STANDING  UP,  WAS  BAPTIZED." 

Acts  ix.  17,  18.  "And  Ananias  went  his  way,  and 
entered  into  the  house :  and  putting  his  hands  on  him, 
said.  Brother  Saul,  the  Lord  (even  Jesus  that  appeared 
unto  thee  in  the  way  as  thou  earnest)  hath  sent  me,  that 
thou  mightest  receive  thy  sight,  and  be  filled  with  the 
Holy  Ghost.  And  immediately  there  fell  from  his  eyes, 
as  it  had  been  scales :  and  he  received  sight  forthwith, 
and  arose,  and  was  baptized." 

The  following  is  St.  Paul's  own  account  of  the  same. 
Acts  XX.  12,  16.  "And  one  Ananias,  a  devout  man 
according  to  the  law,  having  a  good  report  of  all  the 
Jews  which  dwelt  there,  came  unto  me,  and  stood,  and 
said  unto  me,  Brother  Saul,  receive  thy  sight.  And  the 
same  hour,  I  looked  up  upon  him.  And  he  said,  the 
God  of  our  fathers  hath  chosen  thee,  that  thou  shouldest 
know  his  will,  and  see  that  Just  One,  and  shouldest  hear 
the  voice  of  his  mouth.  For  thou  shalt  be  his  witness 
unto  all  men,  of  what  thou  hast  seen  and  heard.  And 
now  why  tarriest  thou?  arise  and  be  baptized  and  wash 
away  thy  sins,  calling  on  the  name  of  the  Lord." 

These  two  narratives  are  essentially  the  same.  Saul 
had  been  struck  with  blindness,  and  three  days'  praying 
and  fasting  in  the  house  of  Judah — Ananias  is  sent  to 
him  by  the  Lord,  finds  him  engaged  in  prayer,  lays  his 
hands  upon  him,  saying,  "receive  thy  sight," — scales 
of  blindness  fall  from  his  eyes — he  looks  up,  and  Ana- 
nias bids  him  "arise  and  be  baptized," — and  he  arose 
and  was  baptized.  Literally,  "standing  up,  he  was 
baptized." 

Now  what  do,  we  find  here  pointing  out  the  exclusive 


POURINa  OUT  OF  THE  SPIRIT  CALLED  BAPTISM.     327 

mode  of  immersion  ?  So  far  as  the  narrative  and  cir- 
cumstances indicate  any  thing,  it  is  that  of  baptism  in 
the  room  and  on  the  spot  where  Ananias  found  him; 
which  suggest  pouring  or  sprinkling  rather  than  immer- 
sion. "  Standing  up,  he  was  baptized."  Imagination 
can  take  him  out  to  a  river  or  pool  and  make  a  great 
display — but  as  faithful  interpreters  of  God's  word,  we 
must  confine  ourselves  to  the  laws  of  interpretation — 
we  must  be  governed  by  the  record  and  circumstances 
of  the  case.  We  cannot,  therefore,  infer  immersion,  or 
confine  baptism  to  that  particular  mode,  from  such  an 
account  as  this.     But  rather  the  contrary. 

5.  We  come  now  to  the  first  baptism  of  any,  outside 
of  the  pale  of  the  Jewish  Church.  Cornelius,  a  gentile 
and  Roman  officer,  but  truly  a  devout  man,  was  com- 
manded by  an  angel  to  send  for  Peter,  who  received  also 
instructions  by  a  vision,  not  to  despise  the  gentiles,  and 
went  to  the  house  of  Cornelius,  and  there  preached  to 
him  and  his  friends  collected  together,  Jesus. 

Acts  X.  44,  48.  ''While  Peter  yet  spake  these  words, 
the  Holy  Ghost  fell*  on  all  them  which  heard  the  word. 
And  they  of  the  circumcision  which  believed  were  aston- 
ished, as  many  as  came  with  Peter,  because  that  on  the 
gentiles  also  was  poured  outf  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost. 
For  they  heard  them  speak  with  tongues  and  magnify 
God.  Then  said  Peter,  Can  any  man  forbid  water, 
that  these  should  not  be  baptized,  which  have  received 
the  Holy  Ghost  as  well  as  we?  And  he  commanded 
them  to  be  baptized  in  the  name  of  the  Lord." 


328    POURING  OUT  OF  THE  SPIRIT  CALLED  BAPTISM. 

This  though  the  first  baptism  among  uninitiated  gen- 
tiles, is  accompanied  with  no  prescribed  mode — nothing 
about  going  to  a  pool  or  a  bath — simply  a  command  at 
the  lime  and  place  that  they  be  baptized.  And  when  it 
was  heard  at  Jerusalem  that  "  the  gentiles  had  received 
the  word  of  God,"  it  caused  much  commotion  among 
the  '^circumcision."  And  St.  Peter  thus  rehearsed  the 
matter : — 

Acts  xi.  15, 17.  "And  as  I  began  to  speak,  the  Holy 
Ghost  fell*  on  them,  as  on  us  at  the  beginning.  Then 
remembered  I  the  word  of  the  Lord,  how  that  he  said, 
John  indeed  baptized  with  water ;  but  ye  shall  be  bap- 
tized with  the  Holy  Ghost.  For  as  much  then  as  God 
gave  them  the  like  gift,  as  he  did  unto  us,  who  believed 
on  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  what  was  I,  that  I  could  with- 
stand God." 

There  is  nothing  to  suggest  the  mode  of  their  baptism 
in  this  case,  unless  it  be  the  baptism  of  the  Holy  Ghost, 
which  is  described  as  "fell  upon"  or  "shed  forth," 
and  "poured  out;"  and  which  St.  Peter  himself  says 
he  regarded  as  the  fulfillment  of  the  promise  of  the 
Lord — "ye  shall  be  baptized  with  the  Holy  Ghost." 
And  seeing  .these  were  baptized  by  the  Holy  Ghost, 
immediately  baptism  by  water  was  suggested  to  his 
mind ;  and  he  asked,  "  Can  any  man  forbid  water,  that 
these  should  not  be  baptized,  who  have  received  the 
Holy  Ghost  as  well  as  we?"  When  an  invisible  opera- 
tion is  likened  to  something  visible,  we  may  presume  it 

*    E7tf7t£(5£. 


PAUL  AND  SILAS  AT  PHILIPPI.  329 

is  because  of  some  resemblance  between  the  things  asso- 
ciated together.  Between  pouring  out  of  the  Spirit 
and  dipping  of  the  body  under  water,  there  is  cer- 
tainly very  little.  But  pouring  the  water  on  the  head, 
and  pouring  out  of  the  Spirit  on  men,  very  strikingly 
resemble  each  other;  while  bap>tism  by  the  Holy  Ghost 
and  hajptism  by  water,  have  both  the  same  leading  object 
in  view — the  purification  and  renewal  of  the  heart.* 
And  both  were  intimately  associated  in  the  minds  of 
John  the  Baptist,  the  Saviour,  and  his  apostles. f 

Pouring  being  the  only  mode  alluded  to  in  the  case 
of  Cornelius  and  his  friends,  it  is  consequently  the  mode 
suggested  by  the  narrative  of  tlieir  baptism,  and  not 
immersion.  Therefore,  from  this  case,  instead  of  finding 
authority  for  confining  baptism  to  immersion,  we  are 
led  to  the  opposite  conclusion. 

6.  The  next  case  from  which  any  thing  can  be 
inferred  from  the  circumstances,  under  which  it  was 
administered,  is  that  of  the  jailer.  Paul  and  Silas 
had  been  apprehended,  beaten,  and  thrown  into  prison ! 
An  earthquake  the  same  night  threw  open  the  2^rison 
doors,  and  the  jailer  being  aroused /rom  sleep,  and  find- 
ing them  open,  supposed  the  prisoners  had  escaped,  and 
was  about  to  kill  himself.  Paul  called  to  him  to  do 
himself  no  harm,  saying,  "We  are  all  here." 

The  jailer  called  for  a  light,  sprang  in,  and  fell  down 
at  the  apostles'  feet,  and  "brought  them  out  (of  the 
inner  prison,)  and  said,  'Sirs,  what  must  I  do  to  be 
saved?'  " 

*  John  iii.  5  ;  Acts  ii.  38  ;  Titus  iii.  5. 
cts  i. 

28* 


380  PAUL  AND  SILAS  AT  PHILIPPI. 

Acts  xvi.  31-34.  "And  they  said,  Believe  on  the  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  and  thou  shalt  be  saved,  and  thy  house. 
And  they  spoke  unto  him  the  word  of  the  Lord,  and  to 
all  that  were  in  his  house.  And  he  took  them  the  same 
hour  of  the  night,  and  washed  their  stripes,  and  was 
BAPTIZED,  he  and  all  his,  straightway/."  And  when  he 
had  brought  them  into  his  house,  he  set  meat  before 
them,  and  rejoiced,  believing  in  God  with  all  his  house." 

Here  the  baptism,  like  that  of  Cornelius  and  others, 
was  administered  forthwith,  the  same  hour  of  the  night, 
even  before  they  went  into  the  apartment  where  the 
jailer  lived,  as  it  appears.  The  earthquake  having 
aroused  all  in  and  about  the  prison,  they  had  collected 
together,  probably  in  the  outer  court,  where  the  apostles 
addressed  them.  The  jailer  first  washed  the  lacerated 
bodies  of  the  apostles,  and  was  then  baptized,  he  and  all 
his,  straightway.  After  which  he  took  them  into  his 
own  apartment  and  set  meat  before  them.  The  apos- 
tles preached  to  all  present,  the  {oixlaj  '^household," 
which  includes  the  domestics  and  attendants  of  an  estab- 
lishment— but  only  the  jailer  and  his  own  immediate 
family  (ol  avtov  rcdvtsij  were  baptized. 

There  is  nothing  written  in  this  place  to  indicate  the 
mode  of  this  baptism;  but  the  late  hour  of  the  night, 
within  prison  walls,  and  without  any  apparent  delay, 
all  taken  together,  suggest  the  probability  of  any  other 
mode,  rather  than  that  of  immersion.  We  are  not 
informed  that  prisons,  in  those  days,  were  fitted  up 
with  baths  and  conveniences  of  like  nature.  And  no 
allusion  being  made  to  such  things  or  to  immersion,  we 


BAPTISM  OF  JOHN'S  DISCIPLES  AT  EPHESUS.        331 

have  no  right  to  assume  them.  Consequently  this,  like 
all  the  other  cases  examined,  fails  to  point  out  a  case  of 
immersion,  or  to  show  any  authority  for  confining  bap- 
tism to  that  mode. 

7.  The  only  remaining  instance  of  baptism,  from 
which  the  slightest  inference  as  to  mode  could  be 
drawn,  is  that  at  Ephesus.  The  Apostle  Paul  meeting 
with  certain  disciples  there,  said  unto  them — 

Acts  xix.  2,  6.  "  Have  ye  received  the  Holy  Ghost, 
since  ye  believed?  And  they  said  unto  him,  we  have  not 
so  much  as  heard  whether  there  be  any  Holy  Ghost. 
And  he  said  unto  them,  unto  what  then  were  ye  bap- 
tized? And  they  said,  unto  John's  baptism.  Then, 
said  Paul,  John  verily  baptized  with  the  baptism  of 
repentance,  saying  unto  the  people,  that  they  should 
believe  on  him  which  should  come  after  him,  that  is,  on 
Christ  Jesus.  When  they  heard  this,  they  were  bap- 
tized in  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus.  And  when  Paul 
had  laid  his  hands  on  them,  the  Holy  Ghost  came  upon 
them." 

We  certainly  do  not  find  any  intimation  of  immersion 
in  this  place.  If  an  inference  affecting  the  mode  can 
be  drawn  from  it,  it  is  that  the  narrative  would  intimate 
more  delay  between  the  baptism  and  laying  on  of  the 
apostles  hands,  in  the  case  of  immersion,  than  the 
record  indicates.  Its  natural  interpretation  leads  one 
to  infer  that  the  imposition  of  hands  followed  immedi- 
ately after  the  baptism,  and  without  any  such  delay  as 
the  immersions  of  the  present  day  require. 


332  NO  CASE  OF  UNEQUIVOCAL  BAPTISM. 

We  have  now  examined  every  case  of  Christian  bap- 
tism in  the  New  Testament  that  can  throw  any  light  on 
the  mode.  Some  other  cases  of  the  mere  fact  of  bap- 
tism, without  any  reference  to  the  circumstances,  are 
mentioned — as  the  baptism  of  Lydia  and  her  family,  of 
Stephanas  and  his  family.  Of  Crispus  and  Gains,  &c. — 
but  only  ih.Q  fact^  is  recorded.  We  have  considered  all 
in  which  the  language  or  circumstances  give  any  intima- 
tion as  to  how  they  were  probably  performed. 

Have  we  then  found  a  single  case  of  unequivocal 
immersion  ?  or  any  thing  that  can  authorize  any  man, 
or  any  set  of  men,  to  confine  baptism  to  immersion, 
and  pronounce  all  other  modes  invalid?  The  first  that 
occurred  under  the  Christian  dispensation,  that  of  three 
thousand  in  Jerusalem,  Avas  under  circumstances  highly 
unfavorable^  instead  of  favorable  to  immersion.  And 
all  that  we  have  heard  about  baths  and  cisterns  in 
Jerusalem,  (for  which  we  have  never  yet  seen  reliable 
authority,)  do  not  meet  the  difficulties.  Besides,  what 
could  the  cistern  in  Jerusalem  do  for  other  places  ? 
Paul  was  baptized  in  Damascus,  Cornelius  in  Caesarea, 
the  jailer  at  Philippi,  and  others  at  Ephesus;  not  one  of 
which  was  ever  in  Judea.  And  in  every  case  not  the 
slightest  intimation  to  lead  one  to  suppose  they  were 
immersed ;  but  on  the  contrary,  under  circumstances 
and  recorded  m  terms,  that  suggest  affusion  or  asper- 
sion as  the  most  probable. 

The  only  case,  the  narrative  of  which  could  suggest 
the  idea  of  immersion,  is  that  of  the  Eunuch,  and  this 
to  such  as  are  governed  entirely  by  our  English  trans- 
lation ;   for  the  original  Greek,  as  we   have  shown,  is 


THE  MODE  INDICATED  BY  THE  HOLY  SPIRIT.        333 

susceptible  not  only  of  diiferent  rendering,  but  of  one 
that  excludes  even  the  possibility/  of  immersion.  The 
present  translation  in  our  English  version  does  not 
teach  immersion,  nor  could  any  rendering  of  -which  the 
passage  is  susceptible  teach  it.  Laying  aside  the  cir- 
cumstances, and  placing  every  thing  in  the  most  favor- 
able light,  neither  immersion  nor  any  other  particular 
mode  can  be  inferred  from  it;  therefore,  it  gives  no 
authority  for  any  exclusive  mode.  Shall  we  then  base 
an  invariable  law  on  such  a  passage,  and  make  immer- 
sion the  only  valid  baptism?  Surely  not.  The  only 
mode  of  baptism  which  we  have  seen  clearly  indicated, 
is  that  of  the  baptism  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  And  this, 
under  the  "figures  of  '^poured  out,"  ^' shed  forth,''  and 
^'descending.''  And  this  baptism,  intimately  associated 
with  the  baptism  of  water  in  the  minds  of  the  apostles, 
as  St.  Peter's  own  words  proA^e.  Therefore,  if  we  are 
guided  in  our  practice  of  baptism  by  the  teaching  of 
the  Holy  Scriptures,  in  connection  with  the  recorded 
instances  therein,  pouring  and  sp)rinMing  have  both 
stronger  claims  to  our  election  than  immersion. 

III.  But  great  reliance  is  placed  on  certain  figurative 
allusions  to  baptism  by  the  Apostle  Paul,  who,  in  the 
first  place,  having  shown  how  the  second  Adam  redeemed 
us  from  the  condemnation  of  the  first,  in  order  to  fore- 
stall the  inference  which  he  supposes  some  might  draw, 
that  we  may  continue  in  sin  that  grace  may  abound,  re- 
plies— 

Kom.  vi.  2-6.  "  God  forbid  :  how  shall  we  that  are 
dead  to  sin,  live  any  longer  therein  ?     Know  ye  not. 


334   NOT  THE  SYMBOL  BUT  THE  END  OF  BAPTISM. 

that  SO  many  of  us  as  were  baptized  into  Jesus 
Christ  were  baptized  into  his  death?  Therefore,  we 
are  buried  with  him  by  baptism  into  death ;  that  like  as 
Christ  was  raised  up  from  the  dead  by  the  glory  of  the 
Father,  even  so  we  also  should  walk  in  newness  of  life. 
For  if  we  have  been  planted  together  in  the  likeness  of 
his  death,  we  shall  be  also  in  the  likeness  of  his  resur- 
rection. Knowing  this  that  our  old  man  is  crucified 
with  him,  that  the  body  of  sin  might  be  destroyed,  that 
henceforth  we  should  not  serve  sin." 

It  is  inferred  from  the  words  "  buried  with  him  by 
baptism  into  death,"  that  i\iQmode  of  baptism  is  com- 
pared to  a  BURIAL ;  and  hence  evidence  of  baptism  by 
immersion.  But  before  we  interpret  figurative  lan- 
guage, we  should  examine  the  subject  matter  in  hand. 
St.  Paul  was  not  discussing  the  mode  of  baptism,  nor 
the  authority  of  baptism.  Our  deliverance  from  sin 
through  Christ,  was  his  subject.  And  we  being  delivered 
from  its  condemnation,  through  Christ,  he  tells  us,  we 
must  seek  to  be  delivered  from  its  practice  also.  For 
if  we  recognize  him  as  our  deliverer,  by  means  of  his 
death,  then  regarding  him  as  our  substitute,  we  must 
reckon  ourselves  as  having  died  with  him ;  and  being 
dead  unto  sin,  henceforth  live  only  unto  God  through 
Christ ;  and  not  let  sin  reign  in  our  bodies.  For  this 
end  he  died,  and  we  were  grafted  into  him  by  baptism 
to  be  partakers  of  his  death  for  this  end.  We  were, 
therefore,  made  one  with  him  in  his  death ;  hence  bu- 
ried with  him  by  baptism,  as  the  instrument  by  which 
we  are  united  to  him  and  made  one  with  him.     Not  by 


CHRIST  OUR  REPRESENTATIVE  HEAD.  335 

baptism  as  tlie  symbol  of  his  death,  but  as  the  appointed 
medium  of  our  visible  connection  with  him  and  through 
him  with  his  death.  Thus  grafted  into  him  as  our  repre- 
sentative head,  we  died  unto  sin  with  him,  and  being 
dead  to  sin  in  him  by  the  same  simile,  we  should  regard 
ourselves  as  having  risen  with  him,  and  henceforth  walk 
with  him  in  newness  of  life. 

The  Apostle  evidently  refers  to  the  final  eiid  for 
which  we  are  baptized,  and  not  to  the  mode.  We  are 
baptized  into  Christ  for  what  end  ?  Not  merely  as  our 
head  and  deliverer,  from  the  condemnation  of  the  first 
Adam,  but  from  the  power  and  condemnation  of  all  sin. 
How  did  he  deliver  us  from  all  sin  ?  By  his  death. 
Then  we  were  baptized  into  his  death  to  obtain  this 
deliverance.  And  if  into  his  death,  on  the  same  prin- 
ciple were  we  buried  with  him,  and  should  regard  our- 
selves as  dead  to  sin ;  and  as  Christ  was  raised  from 
the  dead  by  the  power  of  the  Father,  we  also  being 
raised  with  him,  should  walk  with  him  in  newness  of 
life.  No  necessary  allusion  to  the  mode  of  baptism  in 
all  this.  It  would  be  turning  aside  from  tracing  the 
great  principle  and  consequent  duties  of  our  connection 
with  the  death  and  sufi'erings  of  Christ  to  follow  after 
an  incidental  resemblance,  to  refer  the  mode  in  such  a 
connection.  He  is  treating  of  that  connection  as  a^fact, 
not  as  a  symbol.  Hence  he  goes  on  to  say,  "that  like 
as  Christ  was  raised  up  from  the  dead  by  the  glory 
(power)  of  the  Father,  even  so  we  also  should  walk  in 
newness  of  life."  Being  made  one  with  him  in  his 
death,  we  should  be  one  with  him  in  his  resurrection. 
The  same  idea  is  continued  through  the  next  verse,  (5 :) 


336  CHRIST  OUR  REPRESENTATIVE  HEAD. 

''For  if  we  have  been  united  together  in  the  similitude 

of  his  death,  (Ei  yap  Gvfx<pvtot.  y^yovafxsv  rw  d/j-otiofxatL  rov^avdtov 

avTov,)  we  shall  be  also  of  his  resurrection."  That  is, 
having  been  made  one  with,  him  by  baptism  into  his 
death,  the  same  similitude  shall  continue  in  regard  to 
his  resurrection.  ''  Knowing  this,  that  our  old  man  is 
C7'ucified  with  him,  that  the  body  of  sin  might  be  de- 
stroyed, that  henceforth  we  should  not  serve  sin."  (Ver. 
6.)  From  which  we  see  the  same  principle  connects  us 
with  his  crucifixion  and  reign  in  our  hearts,  as  well  as 
with  his  death  and  resurrection.  Our  "  old  man  was 
crucified  Avith  him  that  the  body  of  sin  might  be  de- 
stroyed," and  we  henceforth  live  unto  Christ,  instead  of 
serving  sin. 

Now  does  baptism  as  a  symbol  shadow  forth  the  Cru- 
cifixion, Death,  Burial,  Resurrection  and  Reign  of 
Christ  in  our  hearts,  or  does  it  rather  connect  us  eccle- 
siastically— aye,  really,  if  rightly  received — with  all 
these  through  him  our  representative  head  ? 

Much  noise  has  been  made  over  our  present  transla- 
tion of  the  5th  verse — "  For  if  w^e  have  been  planted 
together,  in  the  likeness  of  his  death,  we  shall  be  also  in 
the  likeness  of  his  resurrection."  This,  though  not  as 
literal  as  that  which  w^e  have  given  it,  yet  when  rightly 
interpreted,  conveys  the  same  idea  under  a  different 
figure.  The  simile  is  taken  from  grafting  scions  into 
another  stock ;  thus  we  are  grafted  into  Christ,  and 
through  him  into  his  death  by  baptism — ("  as  many  as 
were  baptized  into  Christ  were  baptized  into  his 
death") — and  being  made  one  with  him  by  baptism,  as 
the  scion  and  stock  become  one  tree,  wc  must  grow  up 


BAPTISM  CALLED  CIRCUMCISION  OF  CHRIST,        337 

with  him  as  one  tree.  When  he  atoned  for  our  sins, 
we,  as  in  a  figure,  suffered  with  him.  Being  thus 
''  planted  together  in  the  likeness  of  his  death,  we  shall 
he  also  [not  were]  in  the  likeness  of  his  resurrection." 
"  In  the  likeness,"  here,  in  the  last  clause,  is  supplied, 
not  being  in  the  original,  and  may  refer  to  our  conduct 
in  life,  or  to  our  future  resurrection.  There  is  no  neces- 
sary symbol  of  baptism  by  immersion. 

Substitute  in  the  place  of  baptism,  the  rite  of  circum- 
cision, and  the  meaning  will  be  the  same,  and  followed 
by  the  same  legitimate  deductions.  "  Know  ye  not  that 
so  many  of  us  as  were  circumcised  into  Jesus  Christ 
were  circumcised  into  his  death  ?  Therefore,  we  are 
buried  with  him  by  circumcision  into  death.  That  like 
as  Christ  was  raised  from  the  dead,  by  the  glory  of  the 
Father,  even  so  we  also  should  walk  in  newness  of 
life.  For  if  we  have  been  united  together  in  the  simili- 
tude of  his  death,  or  planted  together  in  the  likeness 
of  his  death,  we  shall  be  also  of  his  resurrection." 

Here  all  that  the  context  suggests — all  that  the  scope 
of  the  reasoning  requires,  are  preserved,  and  the  legiti- 
mate deductions  the  same,  without  any  symbol  of  death 
in  the  rite. 

Nor  is  circumcision  a  forced  and  unauthorized  substi- 
tute in  such  a  connection.  The  Apostle  Paul  introduces 
with  this  same  figure,  the  same  subject  in  another 
place,  and  calls  baptism  the  "circumcision  of  Christ." 
Writing  to  the  Colossians,  he  says,  chap.  ii.  9-12  : 
"  For  in  him  [Christ]  dwelleth  all  the  fullness  of  the 
Godhead  bodily.  And  ye  are  complete  in  him,  which 
is  the  head  of  all  principality  and  power:  in  whom 
29 


338  RITUAL  UNION  WITH  CHRIST. 

also  ye  are  circumcised  with  the  circumcision  made 
without  hands,  in  putting  off  the  body  of  the  sins  of  the 
flesh,  by  the  circumcision  of  Christ ;  buried  with  him  in 
[or  by]  baptism,  wherein  also  ye  are  risen  with  him, 
through  the  faith  of  the  operation  of  God,  who  hath 
raised  him  from  the  dead."  The  "circumcision  of 
Christ"  and  baptism  are  here  made  synonymous  terms. 
Now  continue  the  first,  which  has  the  same  meaning,  in 
the  place  of  baptism,  and  it  would  read,  "buried  with 
him  in  [or  by]  the  circumcision  of  Christy  wherein  also 
ye  are  risen  w^ith  him"  (not  by  hands  from  a  "  liquid 
grave,"  but)  "through  the  faith  of  the  operation  of  God, 
who  hath  raised  him  from  the  dead."  The  preposition 
before  baptism,  in  the  passage  to  the  Romans,  is  5ta, 
which  means,  "through,  by,  by  means  of;"  in  this  to 
the  Colossians,  it  is  iv,  which,  as  we  have  before  seen, 
means  "in,  by,  at,  for,  with,"  &c.  So  that  nothing  can 
be  claimed  for  the  phrase,  "in  baptism,"  but  rather  the 
reverse. 

Therefore,  these  passages,  on  which  so  much  reliance 
is  placed  for  immersion,  really  prove  nothing,  so  far  as 
the  mode  of  baptism  is  concerned.  All  that  can  with 
certainty  be  inferred  from  them  is,  that  there  may  be 
an  allusion  to  the  mode,  but  that  is  all.  But  if  there  is 
such  an  allusion,  it  is  neither  necessary  to  the  scope  of  the 
Apostle's  reasoning,  nor  can  it  be  proved  from  the  lan- 
guage employed.  Indeed,  when  closely  examined,  the 
symbol  supposed  is  not  so  striking  as  some  imagine. 
The  Apostle  does  not  say  we  are  buried  with  him  by 
baptism  as  in  a  grave,  but  by  baptism  into  his  death. 
He  points  to  the  object  for  which  we  are  baptized — not 


RITUAL  UNION  WITH  CHRIST.  339 

to  the  mode.  It  is  merely  the  sound  of  words  familiar, 
and  association  of  death  with  burial,  that  lead  so  many 
to  suppose  that  immersion  under  water  is  alluded  to. 
Keeping  in  mind  the  end  that  the  Apostle  has  in  view, 
we  shall  not  be  drawn  aside  to  imaginary  resemblances. 
He  includes  with  the  sign  the  thing  signiffed — treats  of 
the  internal  under  the  name  of  external.  Thence  he 
also  says,  ''We  are  crucified  with  Christ;"  but  he  does 
not  mean  that  we  have  hung  upon  the  cross  as  a  sym- 
bol of  crucifixion.  He  likewise  says,  "As  many  as 
have  been  baptized  in  Christ  have  put  on  Christ;"  but 
he  does  not  mean  that  putting  on  clothes  is  a  symbol 
of  the  mode  of  baptism.  He  designs  to  teach  that  by 
baptism  as  the  appointed  rite,  we  put  on  Christ  as  a 
garment — were  crucified  with  him  in  our  affections — died 
with  him  on  his  cross — and  were  buried  with  him  in  his 
death.  We  were,  therefore,  baptized  into  his  death  for 
the  death  of  our  sins — henceforth  to  live  a  new  life. 

This  affords  an  explanation  of  what  the  Apostle 
means  when  he  asks,  "  Else  what  shall  they  do  which 
are  baptized  for  the  dead,  if  the  dead  rise  not  at  all  ? 
Why  are  they  then  baptized  for  the  dead?"  (1  Cor.  xv. 
29.)  They  had  been  baptized  into  the  death  of  Christ, 
for  death  to  their  sins,  and  regeneration  in  their  second 
Adam.  If  he  had  not  risen,  "  then  their  faith  was 
vain,"  and  they  were  yet  in  their  sins.  For  in  his  re- 
surrection depended  the  validity  of  his  atonement,  and 
was  involved  the  earnest  of  their  own  resurrection. 

The  Apostle  was  reasoning  with  those  who  denied 
the  resurrection  of  the  body.  This,  he  argued,  involved 
the  truth  of  Christ's  resurrection.     And  if  Christ  had 


340      REGENERATED  IN  CHRIST  OUR  SECOND  ADAM. 

not  risen,  then  his  death,  into  which  they  had  been 
baptized,  for  death  to  their  sins,  had  not  accomplished 
for  them  what  they  sought,  and  they  were  all  yet  in 
their  sins.  Now  had  baptism  been  received  among 
them  as  the  symbol  of  a  burial  under  the  water,  and 
resurrection  from  the  "liquid  grave,"  how  could  tlie 
Corinthians  have  rejected  the  doctrine  of  the  resurrec- 
tion of  the  body  ?  If  every  baptism  was  to  them  a 
symbol  of  death  and  resurrection,  they  would  hardly 
have  adopted  the  idea  that  there  was  "no  resurrec- 
tion." But  regarding  baptism  as  the  symbol  of  cleans- 
ing and  seal  of  their  covenant  relations  with  Christ, 
the  question  is  diiferent.  Their  connection  with  his 
death  is  seen  in  another  form;  and  their  baptism  into 
his  death  is  for  the  death  of  their  sins.  And  the  Apos- 
tle may  well  ask,  why  are  they  then  baptized  for  the 
dead — the  death  of  Christ,  and  their  own  death  to  their 
sins — if  Christ  has  not  risen  to  accomplish  this  end  for 
them?  These  objects  are  sufficient  for  "the  dead"  to 
be  put  in  the  plural,  whether  for  the  "plural  of  dignity" 
or  of  numbers. 

By  the  same  principle  we  understand  what  the  Apos- 
tle means  in  his  Epistle  to  Titus,  when  he  says,  chap, 
iii.  5,  6 :  "  Not  by  works  of  righteousness  which  we 
have  done,  but  according  to  his  mercy  he  saved  us,  by 
the  washing  of  regeneration  and  the  renewing  of  the 
Holy  Ghost,"  which  he  shed  or  poured  on  us  abundantly 
through  Jesus  Christ  our  Saviour.  He  uses  the  com- 
mon word,  Tiovtpov,  for  washing,  as  synonymous  with 
baptism,  and  includes  with  the  outward  sign  the  thing 
signified ;  by  which  we  are  regenerated  in  Christ,  the 
second  Adam. 


BAPTISM   IS  THE  EMBLEM  OF  PURITY.  341 

The  same  great  principle  also  explains  the  meaning 
of  the  Apostle  Peter,  when  he  tells  us  the  saving  of 
Noah  and  his  family  in  the  ark  by  water,  was  a  type 
of  baptism.  1  Peter  iii.  20-22  :  "  When  once  the  long 
suffering  of  God  waited  in  the  days  of  Noah,  while  the 
ark  was  a  preparing,  wherein  few,  that  is,  eight  souls, 
were  saved  by  water.  The  like  figure  whereunto,  even 
baptism,  doth  also  now  save  us,  (not  the  putting  away 
of  the  filth  of  the  flesh,  but  the  answer  of  a  good  con- 
science towards  God,)  by  the  resurrection  of  Jesus 
Christ,  who  is  gone  into  Heaven,  and  is  on  the  right 
hand  of  God,  angels  and  authorities  and  powers  being 
made  subject  unto  him."  The  resemblance  is  in  the 
instrumentality  of  water  floating  the  ark  wherein  Noah 
was  saved,  and  baptism  bringing  us  into  the  Church  of 
Christ  as  the  ark  of  our  salvation.  As  the  waters  of 
the  flood,  which  destroyed  the  old  world,  were  made 
instrumental  in  saving  Noah  and  his  family  in  the  ark, 
so  the  waters  of  baptism,  by  which  we  are  initiated 
into  the  Church  and  thereby  connected  with  Christ,  are 
made  ritually  instrumental  in  saving  us.  But  lest  we 
.might  from  such  language  infer  that  the  mere  outward 
application  of  the  water  saves,  he  explains,  it  is  the 
thing  symbolized — to  wit,  the  internal  purification,  cor- 
responding to  the  emblem — "not  the  putting  away  of 
the  filth  of  the  flesh,  but  the  answer  of  a  good  con- 
science toward  God" — the  possession  and  fulfilling, 
through  the  Spirit,  what  baptism  implies :  which  saves, 
through  the  resurrection  of  Jesus  Christ. 

In  this,  as  in  the  other  cases  just  examined,  the  sym- 
bol is  of  baptism  as  the  instrument,  ritually  grafting  us 

29* 


342  BAPTISM  IS  THE  EMBLEM  OE  PURITY. 

into  Christ,  and  not  of  the  mode  of  baptizing.  To  sup- 
pose there  is  an  allusion  to  the  mode  of  immersion  in 
saving  Noah  in  the  ark,  is  to  suppose  it  to  be  found  in 
every  place  where  water  is  alluded  to.  Those  who  were 
lost  in  the  flood,  were  literally  immersed — were  buried; 
but  not  those  who  were  ''  saved."  If  there  be  any  allu- 
sion to  the  mode  of  baptism,  it  must  be  the  pouring 
down  of  the  rain  upon  the  ark.  We  can  see  no  other, 
nor  admit  this,  unless  some  portion  of  it  perchance  wet 
the  persons  of  Noah  and  his  family. 

There  is  an  allusion  to  purification,  as  ^'  the  putting 
away  of  the  filth  of  the  flesh"  by  washing  of  water, 
clearly  indicates.  And  such  is  the  emblem  wherever 
water  baptism  is  used.  It  symbolizes  purity — the  wash- 
ing away  of  sin.  Its  Office  is  to  graft  us  ritually  into 
Christ — its  Umhlem  is  purity  of  heart — Cleansing,  not  a 
Burial. 

St.  Paul  says,  "  Let  us  draw  near,  in  fullness  of  faith, 
having  our  hearts  sprinkled  from  an  evil  conscience, 
and  our  bodies  washed  with  pure  water."*  Ananias  said 
to  Saul,  "Arise,  and  be  baptized,  and  wash  awayf  thy 
sins."  All  of  which  shows  that  the  emblem  of  baptism, 
as  pointed  out  in  the  Holy  Scriptures,  is  cleansing — 
not  a  burial.  The  imagination  may  make  it  the  emblem 
of  many  things,  and  so  make  it  a  burial;  but  we  do  not 
understand  Christ  or  his  Apostles  so  to  teach.  John 
the  baptist  could  not  refer  to  a  burial ;  yet  it  is  con- 
tended that  his  mode  probably  became  the  mode  of 
Christ.     Nor  did  Christ  command  baptism  to  be  admin- 

*  Heb.  X.  22.    7<.i^ov/xsvot — common  word  for  wash. 
■f  Acts  xxii.  26.     amoXouoac — wash,  or  cleanse  from. 


FIGUKATIVE  ALLUSIONS  ALL  EXAMINED.  343 

istered  as  an  emblem  of  his  death ;  but  be  did  institute 
the  Supper,  and  say  that  the  bread  represented  his  bro- 
ken body,  and  the  cup  or  wine  his  shed  blood,  which  he 
commanded  us  to  eat  and  drink  in  commemoration  of 
his  death.  But  baptism  he  commanded  simply  to  be 
given  in  his  name,  in  union  with  the  name  of  the  Father 
and  of  the  Holy  Ghost. 

But  we  have  now  examined  all  the  figurative  allusions 
made  to  baptism  in  the  New  Testament  that  can  aid  us 
in  our  inquiries.  But  not  a  single  unequivocal  allusion 
to  immersion  has  yet  passed  under  our  eyes.  The  two 
on  which  most  reliance  is  placed,  (Rom.  vi.  and  Col.  ii.) 
instead  of  being  undoubted  symbols  of  the  mode  of  bap- 
tism, are  required  by  the  context  to  refer  to  baptism  as 
the  instrumental  rite,  uniting  us  to  the  death  of  Christ 
as  the  branch  to  the  vine ;  and  hence,  with  his  crucifix- 
ion and  resurrection  as  well  as  his  burial ;  and,  there- 
fore, have  no  necessary  reference  to  the  modal  act  at 
all ;  for  baptism  in  any  mode  could  be  applied  to  the 
same  end.  We  have  seen  also  that  the  resemblance  is 
not  so  apt  for  immersion  in  a  "liquid  grave"  as  some 
suppose :  the  end  for  which  we  are  baptized,  as  the 
Apostle  tells  us,  being  a  death  unto  sin,  and  a  new  birth 
unto  righteousness.  Wherefore,  ^'  we  are  buried  with 
him  J)y  baptism zn/o  [or  unto']  death.''  Not  in  a  "liquid 
grave,"  in  imitation  of  death,  but  with  Christ  in  His 
DEATH,  as  our  representative  head.  Those  baptized  into 
him,  were  baptized  into  his  death,  and  hence  made  par- 
takers of  all  his  sufferings,  so  that  when  he  was  buried, 
they  were  buried  with  him.  Hence  a  principle  brought 
out,  before  which  immersion  as  a  symbol  of  the  mere 


344  FIGURATIVE  ALLUSIONS  ALL  EXAMINED. 

mode  of  burial,  fades  away  as  the  shadow  before  the 
sun. 

Further,  in  the  judgment  of  many  able  and  learned 
divines,  the  baptism  referred  to  in  these  two  passages, 
was  itself  spiritual  baptism ;  and,  therefore,  could  have 
had  no  reference  to  the  baptism  of  water.  And  this 
view  certainly  accords  well  with  what  is  said  in  regard 
to  the  resurrection,  in  the  passage  to  the  Colossians : 
"  Buried  with  him  in  [or  by]  baptism,  wherein  also  ye 
are  risen  with  him."  How  ?  "  Through  the  faith  of 
the  operation  of  God,  who  hath  raised  him  from  the 
dead."  Not  risen  from  the  "liquid  grave,"  by  mortal 
power,  in  resemblance  of  his  resurrection,  but  by  a  spi- 
ritual power,  through  faith  in  the  operation  of  God. 

We  must,  therefore,  have  something  more  certain 
than  a  very  improbable  allusion,  to  bind  our  faith,  or  to 
authorize  us  to  bind  the  faith  of  others.  Even  if  there 
was  no  other  obvious  and  probable  meaning,  we  cannot 
establish  a  principle  of  doctrine  on  a  mere  allusion. 
Much  less  so,  then,  when  that  allusion  cannot  be  proved 
to  have  any  reference  to  the  supposed  object.* 

Thus,  we  have  failed  to  find  in  the  symbols  and  figu- 
rative language  of  the  New  Testament,  any  authority 
for  immersion  as  the  Apostolic  mode  of  Baptism  ! 

We  have,  first,  examined  the  meaning  of  the  word 
baptize,  {BaTtti^u)  and  found  that  the  writers  of  the  New 
Testament  apply  it  to  the  use  of  water  in  several  ways, 
for  ritual  purification,  and  that  instead  of  being  a  spe- 

*  When  the  essence  of  a  Christian  sacrament  is  to  be  determined,  we 
must  decline  admitting  allusions  as  proof,  since  the  evidence  must  be 
clear  and  unequivocated. — Bishop  Kenrick. 


NO  MODES  BUT  THOSE  OF  THE  SPIRIT  INDICATED.  345 

cific  term,  "signifying  always  to  dip,"  it  is  generic  in 
its  character,  and  used  in  the  New  Testament  in  the 
general  sense  of  purifying.  Therefore,  from  the  mean- 
ing of  the  word  alone,  no  particular  mode  of  baptizing 
can  be  inferred. 

In  the  second  place,  we  took  up  the  practice  of  John 
the  baptist,  and  passed  under  review  every  recorded 
instance  of  baptism  by  him,  to  ascertain  what  mode  or 
modes  he  adopted;  and  especially  with  reference  to  the 
mode  of  immersion ;  but  could  find  no  particular  mode 
defined  or  brought  out  from  a  single  case,  nor  from 
them  all  united.  The  use  of  water  and  its  object  are 
recorded  in  specific  terms,  but  the  manner  of  applying 
it  is  treated  as  a  matter  of  indifference,  and  left  unde- 
fined. 

In  the  third  place,  we  examined  the  practice  of  the 
Apostles,  and  investigated  every  case  of  Christian  bap- 
tism, with  all  the  circumstances  connected  therewith, 
and  instead  of  immersion,  found  the  circumstances  more 
favorable  to  a  less  inconvenient  mode,  and  that  the  only 
mode,  in  fact,  clearly  pointed  out,  was  that  of  the  bap- 
tism of  the  Holy  Spirit,  under  the  figures  of  ''  pouring 
out,  shed  forth,  and  descending  upon."  Neither  from 
the  words  of  Christ  nor  the  example  of  his  Apostles, 
have  we  precept  or  example  for  immersion. 

Lastly.  We  examined  the  symbols  and  figurative  lan- 
guage applied  to  the  Christian  baptism  in  the  New 
Testament,  and  still  found  no  certain  allusion  to  the 
mode  of  immersion. 

Therefore,  after  a  rigid  investigation  of  all  that  the 
New  Testament  contains  on  the  subject,  we  affirm,  that 


346  NO  MODES  BUT  THOSE  OF  THE  SPIRIT  INDICATED." 

there  is  not  a  precept,  example,  or  allusion,  from 
which  an  undoubted  inference  for  iminersion  as  the 
mode  of  Christian  baptism  can  be  deduced.  Not  one 
that  any  impartial  or  legal  mind  will  admit,  can  be 
made  the  basis  of  an  invariable  law  to  bind  the  judg- 
ment and  consciences  of  men. 


CHAPTER  XL 


BAPTISM  BY  DIFFERENT  MODES  VALID  IN  EVERY  AGE  OP 
THE  CHURCH. 

At  the  time  of  the  Reformation — Church  of  Geneva — at  Mentz — Council 
of  Cologne — English  Church — Lynwood's  Constitution — Wickliflfe — 
Langres — Synod  of  Angers — Thomas  Aquinas — Bonaventura — Strabo — 
Gennadius  — Augustine — Chrysos  tom  —  Jerome  — Athanasius — Gregory 
Nazianzen — Basil — Baptism  of  Constantine — Washing  before  Pouring — 
Cyprian  —  Lawrence  and  Romanus  —  Novatian — Basilides  —  Oi'igen— 
Tertullian — Clemens  Alexandrinus — Justin  Martyr — Baptism  of  Christ 
— Catacomb  of  Pontianus — Reasons  for  no  prescribed  Mode — Essence 
and  Incidents — Supper  and  Baptism — Greek  Church — Mar  Yohannan^ 
Examination  of  Principles — Summary. 

As  we  are  unwilling  to  shut  out  any  light  that  can 
aid  us  in  the  attainment  of  truth,  even  in  a  question  of 
secondary  importance,  we  will  now  examine  the  testi- 
mony of  history  so  far  as  shall  be  necessary  to  show 
that  baptism  by  different  modes  has  been  allowed  and 
regarded  as  valid  in  every  age  of  the  Church.  For 
although  Baptist  writers  profess  to  ignore  history,  they 
are  in  the  habit  of  making  very  broad  assertions  in 
regard  to  the  history  of  immersion,  such  as  it  was  the 
universal  practice  of  the  Church  for  fifteen  hundred 
years. 

We  will  pass  therefore  to  the  times  of  the  Reforma- 
tion, and  see  what  the  learned  men  of  that  age  said  and 
did  on  this  subject. 


348  TESTIMONY  OF  HISTORY. 

In  1536,  A.  D.,  Calvin  drew  up  a  formula  for  the 
administration  of  the  sacraments  in  the  Church  at 
Geneva.  In  which,  for  the  order  of  baptism  it  was 
written — ''  Then  the  Minister  of  Baptism  pours  water 
on  the  infant,  saying,  I  baptize  thee  in  the  name  of  the 
Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost,"  &c. 
In  his  "Institutes"  he  tells  us — ''The  difference  is  of 
no  moment,  whether  he  that  is  baptized  be  dipped  all 
over,  and  if  so,  whether  thrice  or  once,  or  whether  he 
be  only  wetted  with  the  water  poured  07i  him."  Edit. 
Beg^e,  1576. 

In  1551,  A.  D.,  the  Agenda  of  the  Church  of  Mentz, 
in  Germany,  as  published  by  Sebastian,  directs — "  Then 
let  the  Priest  take  the  child  in  his  arms,  and  holding 
him  over  the  Font,  let  him  with  his  right  hand,  three 
several  times,  take  water  out  of  the  Font  and  pour  it 
on  the  child's  head,  so  that  the  water  may  wet  its  head 
and  shoulders."  A  note  of  explanation  is  added,  which 
informs  its  reader,  that  immersion  or  pouring  is  equally 
valid,  and  that  a  man  will  do  ill  to  break  the  custom  of 
his  church  for  either.  But  gives  several  reasons  why 
pouring  is  better  where  the  church  will  allow  it.* 

In  1536,  A.  D.,  a  Council  of  Cologne  refers  to  it  as 
a  matter  of  indifference,  whether  "  the  child  is  thrice 
dipped,  or  wetted  with  water,"  &c.t 

In  England,  the  Formula  as  set  forth  in  the  book  of 
Common  Prayer,  which  has  been  the  established  rule  of 
the  church  since  the  final  settlement  of  the  Reformation, 
assumes  the  modes  of  baptism  to  be  a  thing  of  indiffer- 
ence, and  requires  the  person  to  be  dipped  or  poured  on, 
*  See  Wall's  Hist.  Bap.,  vol.  ii.  p.  361.  f  Ibid. 


TESTIMONY  OF  HISTORY.  349 

in  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the 
Holy  Ghost. 

And  in  1422,  one  hundred  years  before  the  Reforma- 
tion openly  commenced,  Lynwood,  the  Dean  of  Arches 
under  Henry  Y.,  in  his  account  of  the  English  Consti- 
tution, speaks  of  baptism  by  POUiiiNa  and  sprinkling 
as  alike  valid  with  dipping.  Referring  to  the  more 
common  mode  at  that  time  of  dipping,  he  adds  a  note — 
"  But  this  is  not  to  be  accounted  to  he  of  necessity  to 
haptism;  it  may  he  given  hy  pouring  or  sprinkling. 
A7id  this  holds  especially  where  the  Church  allows  it.'' 
Constit.  lib.  3,  c.  de  Bapt.  cited  by  Wall. 

It  seems  that  in  some  places  the  practice  was  alto- 
gether by  dipping,  and  in  others  altogether  by  aifusion, 
and  in  others  again  both  modes  were  allowed. 

Wickliffe,  the  first  to  preach  the  doctrines  of  the 
Reformation  in  England,  writing  a  half  century  before 
Lynwood,  1380,  says — "iVbr  is  it  material  whether  they 
he  dipped  once  or  thrice^  or  water  he  poured  on  their 
heads:  but  it  must  be  done  according  to  the  custom  of 
the  place  where  one  dwells."  Trial og.  14,  c.  11,  cited 
by  Wall. 

About  the  same  time,  a  Synod  of  Langres,  in  France, 
1404,  on  the  subject  of  baptism,  speaks  only  of  the  mode 
of  pouring — "Let  the  Priest  make  iliVQQ  pourings  or 
sprinklings  of  water  on  the  infant's  head."  Bochell. 
Decret.  Eccl.  Galli.  1.  2,  de  Bap.* 

Advancing  onward  another  century  towards  the  Apos- 
tles, we  come  to  a  Synod  held  in  Angers,  1275  A.  D., 
which  on  the  subject  of  baptism,  directs—''  The  infant 

*  See  Wall's  Hist.  Baptism,  vol.  ii.  pp.  3G0-3G2 

30 


350  TESTIMONY  OF  HISTORY. 

be  dipped  tJirice,  or  the  water  poured  on  three  times, 
according  to  the  general  custom  of  the  Church."  BochelL 
Decret.  Ecch  Galli.  L  2  de  Bap.* 

Some  quarter  of  a  century  before,  Thomas  Aquinas, 
in  Italy,  1255  A.  D.,  writes — "Water  is  used  in  the 
sacrament  of  baptism  for  the  purpose  of  corporal  ablu- 
tion, by  which  the  interior  ablution  from  sins  is  signi- 
fied: and  ablution  with  water  can  be  made,  not  only  by 
immersion,  but  by  aspersion  or  infusion."  §  3,  art.  vii. 
qu.  66,  cited  by  Kenrick. 

Bonaventura,  about  the  same  time,  in  France,  re- 
corded— "  The  way  of  Affusion  is  common  in  France 
and  other  places,  and  was  probably  used  by  the  Apos- 
tles :  but  the  way  of  dipping  is  more  general,"  &c.  L.  4, 
Dist.  3  art.  2,  cited  by  Wall. 

As  sculpture  and  paintings  cannot  be  affected  by 
translations,  but  speak  the  same  language  to  every  age 
and  every  nation,  instead  of  detaining  our  readers  with 
dry  repetitions,  we  shall  let  the  artists  of  several  cen- 
turies teach  us  what  was  recognized  in  their  times.  The 
following  representation  is  the  work  of  Greek  artists, 
and  was  common  in  the  ninth  and  tenth  centuries. 

"  The  boy  is  unclothed,  and  the  ordinance  is  adminis- 
tered by  pouring.  This  representation  shows  that  the 
present  Abyssinian  mode  of  baptism,  as  narrated  by 
Mr.  Salt,  anciently  was  extant  among  the  Greeks  as 
well  as  among  the  Romans.  For,  although  this  plate  is 
at  Home,  yet  it  Avas  the  work  of  Greek  artists,  in  the 
ninth  and  tenth  centuries."  C.  Taylor's  edit,  of  Cal- 
niet's  Bible  Dictionary. 

*  See  Wall's  Hist.  Baptism,  vol.  ii.  pp.  3G0-362. 


TESTIMONY  OF  HISTORY. 


351 


BAPTISM    OUTSIDE    OF    THE    CHURCH. 


Mr.  Salt,  to  whom  reference  is  here  made,  is  a  modern 
English  traveller,  who  describes  the  baptism  of  a  Mus- 
sulman boy  which  took  place  in  his  presence  while  in 
Abyssinia.  The  boy  was  first  washed  all  over  in  a  large 
basin  of  water,  after  which  a  smaller  basin,  called  mete- 
mar  was  brought,  the  water  in  which  was  consecrated 
by  prayer,  and  waving  the  incense  over  it,  dropping  into 
it  a  portion  of  the  meiron  in  the  shape  of  a  cross.  The 
boy  then  repeated  his  belief,  and  answered  certain  ques- 
tions; and  the  priest  dipped  his  own  hand  in  the  water 
and  crossed  him  over  the  forehead,  saying,  "  George,  I 
baptize  thee  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  Son  and  Holy 
Ghost."* 

The  Abyssinian  Church,  was  descended  from  the 
Church  of  Alexandria,  originally  planted  by  St.  Mark, 
and  consisted  chiefly  of  Hebrew  Christians.  We  shall 
notice  this  washing  or  purification  before  baptism,  as 
alluded  to  in  other  places. 

*  Facts  and  Evidences  by  Tajlor.     See  Wall  also. 


352  TESTIMONY  OF  HISTORY. 

The  prevailmg  custom  varied  at  this  time  in  different 
countries ;  in  one,  trine  immersion  was  the  general  rule, 
but  in  cases  of  weakness  and  danger,  the  less  inconve- 
nient mode  of  pouring  and  sprinkling  was  allowed;  in 
others,  pouring  or  affusion  was  the  general  mode. 

In  England  an  effort  was  made  in  the  early  part  of 
the  ninth  century  to  confine  it  to  immersion  only^  except 
in  cases  of  necessity.  A  canon  was  passed  in  816  A.  D., 
requiring  the  priests,  when  they  administered  baptism, 
not  to  pour  the  water  on  the  head  of  the  infant,  but 
always  to  dip  it  in  the  font,  as  the  Son  of  God 
was  thrice  dipped  in  the  waters  of  the  Jordan,  &c.  We 
do  not  wonder  that  a  canon  attempted  to  be  enforced  on 
such  reasoning  availed  but  little.  But  it  explains  the 
reason  why  Erasmus,  in  pointing  to  the  national  pecu- 
liarities or  prevailing  customs  in  regard  to  baptism,  says, 
"With  us,  (the  Dutch,)  they  have  water  poured  on  them; 
in  England  they  are  dipt."  That  is,  dipping  was  the 
prominent  mode,  for  we  know  that  pouring  was  very 
common  in  England  at  the  time  Erasmus  wrote. 

The  following  plate  illustrates  an  earlier  period  than 
the  last,  and  such  representations  were  common  in  the 
seventh  and  eighth  centuries,  and  had  their  origin  in 
the  sixth. 

''  This  depicts  two  points  of  time.  First,  the  candi- 
date is  seen  kneeling  down  and  praying  near  the  bath 
of  water;  and  a  hand  issues  from  a  cloud  above  him, 
to  denote  the  acquiescence  of  heaven  in  his  petitions. 
Second ;  baptism  is  administered  by  pouring  water  out 
of  a  vase  on  persons  who  are  kneeling  on  the  ground, 
and  not  immersed  at  all.      Either  then,  baptism  was 


TESTIMONY  OF  HISTORY. 


353 


ADMINISTRATION    OF    BAPTISM. 


administered  without  immersion^  by  pouring  only;  not- 
withstanding the  convenience  of  the  bath;  or  those 
persons  had  previously  been  immersed  and  afterwards 
received  baptism  as  a  distinct,  subsequent,  and  separate 
act."     Taylor's  edit.  Bible  Dictionary. 

We  shall  not  dwell  on  this  period,  but  pass  on  to  the 
practice  of  the  church  nearer  to  Apostolic  times,  which 
is  of  much  inore  importance  to  us. 

Gennadius,  who  wrote  in  the  close  of  the  fifth  and  in 
the  beginning  of  the  sixth  century,  shows*  that  in  that 
period  baptism  was  administered  in  the  French  church 
by  both  modes,  affusion  and  immersion.  Instituting  an 
analogy  between  martyrdom  and  baptism,  he  says,  "  The 
person  to  be  baptized  owns  his  faith  before  the  priest ; 

30* 


354  TESTIMONY  OF  HISTORY. 

and,  when  the  interrogatories  are  put  to  him,  makes  his 
answer.  The  same  does  a  martyr  before  a  heathen 
judge :  he  also  owns  his  faith  ;  and  when  the  question  is 
put  to  him  makes  answer.  The  one  after  his  confession 
is  either  wetted  with  water  or  else  plunged  into  it:  and 
the  other  is  either  wetted  with  his  blood,  or  else  plunged 
into  fire."     De  Eccl.  dogma,  c.  T4,  cited  by  Wall. 

Augustine,  writing  in  the  earlier  part  of  the  fifth  cen- 
tury, speaking  of  the  virtue  of  the  baptism  through  the 
power  of  the  Spirit,  teaches  that,  however  small  be  the 
quantity  of  water  applied  to  the  infant,  it  cleanses  it 
wholly  from  the  condemnation  (not  the  stain)  of  origi- 
nal sin.  This  is  the  word  of  faith  which  we  preach, 
whereby  baptism  also  is  doubtless  consecrated  that  it 
may  cleanse.  For  Christ  loved  his  church  and  delivered 
himself  up  for  her  !  Read  the  Apostle  and  see  what  he 
he  adds:  "That  he  might  sanctify  her,'  says  he,  'cleans- 
ing her  with  the  laver  of  water  in  the  word  I'  This  puri- 
fication would  by  no  means  be  attributed  to  the  liquid 
and  transient  element,  were  it  not  added,  'in  the  word.' 
This  word  of  faith  is  so  powerful  in  the  Church  of  God, 
that  by  means  of  her  believing,  offering,  blessing ;  ting- 
ing (with  it)  even  in  a  slight  degree,  it  cleanses  the 
infant."     Tract  Ixxx.  in  Joan,  cited  by  Kenrick. 

Thus  in  Augustine's  day  it  was  held  by  the  Church  in 
Africa,  that  the  smallest  quantity  of  water  in  baptism 
cleansed  not  partially,  but  as  entirely  as  a  large  quan- 
tity would :  if  touched  by  it  in  the  slightest  degree,  we 
are  cleansed. 

In  the  latter  part  of  the  fourth  century,  and  only  two 
hundred  and  eighty  years  from  Apostolic  times,  Chry- 


TESTIMONY  OF  HISTORY.  355 

sostom,  Bishop  of  Constantinople,  praising  those  who 
seek  baptism  in  health,  instead  of  putting  it  oif  till  the 
hour  of  sickness  and  danger,  remarks,  "Although  the 
same  gift  of  grace  is  bestowed  on  you,  and  on  those 
who  are  initiated  at  the  close  of  life,  your  free  choice 
and  preparation  are  different ;  for  they  receive  it  in  their 
bed,  you  in  the  bosom  of  the  church,  the  common  mother 
of  us  all;  they  sorrowing  and  weeping,  you  rejoicing  and 
exulting;  they  sighing,  and  you  giving  thanks;  they  in  a 
lethargy  from  fever,  you  full  of  much  spiritual  delight." 
Ad  Illuminandos  Catech.  1,  cited  by  Kenrick. 

They  could  not  plunge  people  under  water  "in  their 
beds." 

Jerome  of  Palestine,  about  the  same  period,  applies 
the  prediction  of  Ezekiel,  "  I  will  sprinkle  clean  water 
upon  you,"  to  baptism. 

A  few  years  nearer  to  the  Apostolic  age,  (274  A.  A.,) 
Ambrose,  Bishop  of  Milan,  addressing  the  neophytes, 
says,  "You  took  afterwards  the  white  garments  to  indi- 
cate that  you  cast  away  the  cloak  of  sin  and  put  on  the 
spotless  robes  of  innocence;  whereof  the  prophet  said: 
'Thou  shalt  sprinkle  me  with  hyssop,  and  I  shall  be 
cleansed:  thou  shalt  wash  me,  and  I  shall  be  made  whiter 
than  snow.'  For  he  that  is  baptized  seems  to  be  cleansed 
both  according  to  the  law  and  the  Gospel :  according  to 
the  law,  since  Moses,  with  a  bunch  of  hyssop  sprinkled 
the  blood  of  the  Lamb :  according  to  the  Gospel,  because 
the  garments  of  Christ  were  white  as  snow,  when  in  the 
Gospel,  he  showed  the  glory  of  his  resurrection.  He 
whose  sins  are  forgiven  is  made  whiter  than  snow."  L. 
ad  initiandos,  c.  7,  cited  by  Kenrick. 


356  TESTIMONY  OF  HISTORY. 

265,  After  the  Apostles,  Athanasius  reckons  up  eight 
baptisms,  and  the  sixth  in  his  enumeration  is  that  of 
"tears."* 

260  A.  A.  Gregory  Nazianzen  uses  similar  language, 
saying,  "  I  know  of  a  fourth  baptism — that  of  martyr- 
dom and  blood  ;  and  I  know  of  a  fifth — that  of  tears. "f 
He  refers  also  to  baptism  at  the  point  of  death,  when 
immersion  could  not  be  often,  if  ever,  practicable. 

260  A.  A.  Basil,  bishop  of  Csesarea,  warning  his 
hearers  against  delay  in  their  baptism,  points  theni  to  a 
time  when  fever,  and  weakness  of  body  and  mind,  may 
render  them  unconscious  of  what  is  going  on,  or  death 
may  come  upon  them  in  the  night,  when  there  is  no  one 
to  give  them  baptism.  He  says:  "If  you  utter  some- 
thing in  a  faint  and  faltering  manner,  it  may  not  be 
understood":  everything  ye  say  will  be  disregarded  as 
the  raving  of  a  dying  man.  Who  will  give  you  baptism 
then  ?  Who  will  remind  you  of  it,  when  you  will  be 
sunk  in  deep  lethargy  ?  Relatives  are  in  affliction : 
strangers  take  no  interest :  friends  are  loth  to  alarm  you 
by  warning.  Perhaps  even  the  physician  deceives  you ; 
and  you  do  not  know  your  situation,  being  blinded  by  the 
love  of  life.  It  is  night,  and  there  is  no  one  to  succor : 
there  is  no  one  at  hand  to  baptize  you." — Hom.  13,  in 
S.  bap.  n.  7  cited  by  Kenrick. 

Such  language  clearly  teaches  that  baptism  may  be 
administered  on  the  dying  bed,  and  at  any  moment, 
which  we  know  could  not  be  done  where  only  plunging 
under  water  is  allowed. 

The  following  plate  shows  that  even  where  immersion, 
*  Pond  cited  by  Hall,  p.  71,  72.  f  Ibid. 


TESTIMONY  OF  HISTORY. 


357 


or  washing   of   the  body  was   practiced,  2)ou7nng    was 
made  a  part  of  the  baptism : 


BAPTISM    OP    THE    EMPEROR    CONSTANTIXE. 


Tliis  is  a  representation  of  the  Baptism  of  Constan- 
tino the  Great.  The  Emperor  receiving  baptism  is 
immersed  in  the  baths,  metaphorically  called  the  ^'  laver 
of  regeneration ;"  and  Eusebius  adds  the  proper  rite  of 
baptism,  "hj  pouring  water  on  the  monarch's  head." 

These  ancient  representations  of  both  Greek  and  Ro- 
man origin,  taken  in  connection  with  other  facts,  have 
led  many  to  suppose  that  pouring  was  the  essential 
part  of  baptism,  and  that  the  immersion  or  washing  was 
a  preparatory  rite  for  receiving  it.  As  under  the  Le- 
vitical  law,  leprosy,*  and  the  touch  of  a  dead  body,t 
and  such  like  things  as  exhibited  the  effects  of  sin  in  its 
more  malignant  character,  required,  besides  washing  the 
body,  the  sprinkling   of   the  "blood  and  water,"  and 


*  Levit.  xiv.  2,  32. 


t  Num.  xix.  9-22. 


358  TESTIMONY  OF  HISTORY. 

''  ashes  and  water,"  to  cleanse  from  tlieir  pollution ;  so 
nothing  less  than  pouring  or  sprinkling,  in  the  name  of 
the  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost,  would  complete  the 
washing  away  of  sin  under  the  Gospel.  Therefore,  first 
there  was  a  washing,  and  then  pouring,  as  represented 
in  the  baptism  of  Constantino,  in  the  preceding  plate, 
and  as  in  the  case  of  the  Abyssinian  Church. 

Whatever  credit  may  be  due  to  this  theory,  it  is  cer- 
tain that  even  in  those  periods  when  immersion  was 
most  general,  it  was  never  regarded  as  essential  to  bap- 
tism. Magnus,  living  in  a  retired  part  of  the  country, 
where  immersion  was  the  usual  practice,  wrote  to  Cypri- 
an, bishop  of  Carthage,  to  learn  whether  those  who  put 
off  their  baptism  by  culpable  delay,  and  received  it  on  a 
bed  of  sickness  by  aspersion  only,  ought  to  share  equal 
privileges  with  their  more  diligent  brethren. 

150  A.  A.  Cyprian,  in  reply,  writes  in  that  modest 
strain  which  characterizes  great  minds,  and  after  giving 
his  opinion,  adds  :  "  The  contagion  of  sin  is  not,  in  the 
sacrament  of  salvation,  washed  off  by  the  same  measures 
that  the  dirt  of  the  skin  and  of  the  body  is  washed  off 
in  an  ordinary  secular  bath :  so  that  there  should  be 
necessity  of  soap  and  other  helps,  and  a  large  pool  or 
fishpond  by  which  that  body  is  washed  or  cleansed.  It 
is  in  another  way  that  the  breast  of  the  believer  is 
washed — after  another  manner  that  the  mind  of  a  man 
is  by  faith  cleansed.  In  the  sacrament  of  salvation, 
where  necessity  compels,  the  shortest  ways  of  transact- 
ing Divine  matters,  do,  by  God's  gracious  Dispensation, 
confer  the  whole  benefit. 

''  And  no  man  need,  therefore,  think  otherwise,  be- 


TESTIMONY  OF  HISTORY. 


359 


cause  these  sick  people,  when  they  receive  the  grace  of 
our  Lord,  have  nothing  but  an  affusion  or  sprinkling : 
whereas  the  Holy  Scripture  by  the  Prophet  Ezekiel 
says :  '  I  will  sprinkle  clean  water  upon  you,  and  you 
shall  be  clean.'  "    Ezek.  xxxvi.  25. 

He  then  refers  to  the  fact  that  none  such  can  be  re- 
baptized — not  even  if  they  themselves  should  think  they 
have  obtained  no  benefit,*  and  further  adds :  ''  The 
Holy  Spirit  is  not  given  by  several  measures,  [as  if  the 
degree  of  the  gift  depended  on  the  quantity  of  water] 
but  is  wholly  poured  on  them  that  believe." — Cypriani 
Epist.  Ixix.  cited  by  Wall. 

The  following  plate  represents  the  baptism  of  Roma- 
nus  by  Lawrence,  who  suffered  martyrdom  not  long  after 
the  above  letter  was  written : 


LAUUENTIUS    BAPTIZING   ROMANUS. 


*  This  passage  has  been  misunderstood  by  some  writers — Bingham 
among  others. 


3b0  TESTIMONY  OF  HISTORY. 

"  This  representation  is  in  the  Church  of  St.  Lawrence, 
extra  muros,  at  Rome,"  says  Taylor,  ''and  the  jugs  or 
vases  are  remarkable,  being  the  same  as  in  other  pic- 
tures of  far  remoter  antiquity."  The  martyr-preacher 
is  represented  to  us  as  baptizing  by  pouring,  in  a 
regular  "baptistery." 

158  A.  A.  "A  little  while  before  his  death,  he  also 
baptized  one  Lucillus  with  d^^ pitcher  of  water.'''^  The 
"Acts"  of  Lawrence  were  interpolated  in  after  ages,  but 
the  above  is  taken  from  Strabo,  who  lived  before  the 
times  when  the  forgeries  and  additions  are  said  to  have 
been  made.t 

120  A.  A.  Early  in  this  century,  Novatian  was  bap- 
tized by  effusion  as  he  lay  sick  on  his  bed.  This  was 
not  noted  as  anything  unusual  at  the  time,  nor  would  it 
have  been  handed  down  to  succeeding  generations,  but 
for  the  fact  he  afterwards  attempted  to  supplant  Corne- 
lius as  the  Bishop  of  Rome,  who,  among  other  things, 
upbraided  him  with  having  delayed  his  baptism  till  ter- 
rified by  the  approach  of  death,  and  then  of  neglecting 
to  receive  confirmation  by  imposition  of  hands  on  his 
recovery.  It  had  become  a  rule  among  Christians  of 
that  age,  and  was  afterwards  enacted  into  a  canon,  that 
those  who  delayed  baptism  till  sickness,  and  were  bap- 
tized under  the  fear  of  approaching  death,  ought  not 
to  be  promoted  to  the  ministry.  An  exception  was 
made  in  cases  of  great  fervency  of  spirit.  Cornelius,  in 
his  letter  to  Fabius,  bishop  of  Antioch,  accuses  Nova- 
tian  of  having  obtained  the  order  of  Priesthood  unlaw- 

*  Acta  Luurcntii,  cited  by  Bingham, 
f  See  Hist.  Bap.  by  Wall,  vol  ii.  p.  356. 


TESTIMONY  OF  HISTORY.  361 

fully,  in  the  first  place,  and  that,  therefore,  he  was  ineligi- 
ble to  the  office  of  Bishop ;  for  all  the  clergy  and  a  majority 
of  the  laity  were  against  his  being  ordained  Presbyter, 
because  it  was  not  lawful  for  "  any  one  baptized  in  bed, 
in  time  of  sickness^''  {-^yj  ^v  x'kivri  6td  vocov  rcepix'^^^^'^^)  "as 
he  had  been,  to  be  admitted  to  any  office  of  clergy."  In 
another  place,  he  says :  "  Baptized  by  affusion  in  bed  as  he 

lay."    (bv  avtrj  tri  xT^ivrj  yj  ixtito  TtfpLxvdtn;.)    No  objoction  WaS 

made  to  the  validity  of  his  baptism  ;  that,  not  allowed, 
would  ha,ve  cut  off  all  his  pretensions  at  once.  The  ob- 
jection was  to  his  criminal  delay  in  receiving  it,  and  to  the 
manner  in  which  he  rose  to  the  office  of  Presbyter,  and 
afterwards  aspired  to  the  bishoprick.* 

100  A.  A.  About  the  close  of  the  first  century  after 
the  Apostles,  or  a  little  later,  Eusebius  informs  us  that 
"  Basilides  was  baptized  in  prison  by  some  brethren, 
and  the  next  day  after  receiving  the  seal,  he  was  be- 
headed, "f  We  can  hardly  suppose  facilities  would  be 
afforded  by  those  in  authority  to  baptize  him  by  immer- 
sion ;  and  thus  aid  in  the  very  thing  for  which  he  was 
imprisoned,  when  they  would  not  allow  him  the  common 
necessaries  of  life. 

120  A.  A.  Origen  represents  the  wood  on  the  altar, 
over  which  water  was  poured  at  the  command  of  Eli- 
jah, (1  Kings  xviii.  33,)  as  having  been  "baptized,"  and 
speaks  of  each  pouring  as  a  baptism. J 

100  A.  A.  Tertullian  applies  the  word  "sprinkling" 
to  the  act  of  baptism.  After  prescribing  the  course  to 
be  observed  by  the  candidate  for  baptism,  and  the  dili- 

.  ^  Cornelius  to  Fabius,  Bishop  of  Antiocb,  apud.  Euseb.  Eccl.  His. 
1.  6,  c.  43. 

f  Eccl.  His.  1.  6,  c.  6.  %  ^^^ts  and  Evidences,  p.  132. 

31 


362  TESTIMONY  OF  HISTORY. 

gence  with  which  every  one  should  prepare  himself,  he 
asks,  "  For  who  will  vouchsafe  to  you,  so  faithless  a 
penitent,  a  single  sprinkle  of  water?"  He  further 
alludes  to  a  fact,  that  shows  others  at  that  time  sup- 
posed wetting  or  sjJrinJcling  was  enough  for  a  baptism. 
Referring  to  the  baptism  of  the  Apostles,  about  which 
there  was  some  speculation  then  as  now,  he  says : 
"  Some,  in  a  manner  quite  forced,  pretend  that  the 
Apostles  underwent  a  kind  of  baptism,  when  in  the  boat 
they  were  sprinkled  [adspei^si)  by  the  waves ;  and  that 
Peter  himself  was  sufficiently  immersed  when  walking 
on  the  sea."*  Now  if  nothing  less  than  plunging  under 
the  water  constituted  baptism,  neither  would  Tertullian 
have  associated  sprinkling  with  it,  nor  others  have  sup- 
posed that  a  partial  wetting  in  the  boat,  or  Peter's 
beginning  to  sink,  was  baptism.  Further  still,  Ter- 
tullian uses,  interchangeably  with  baptize,  the  words, 
tingo — to  wet,  tinge  ;  lavo — to  wash,  bathe  ;  ahluo — to 
cleanse,  purify  ;  and  aspergo — to  sprinkle :  which  proves 
that  he  could  not  have  supposed  baptism  was  confined 
to  one  mode.  It  would  contradict  his  own  language. 
And  yet  he  is  relied  upon  more  than  any  other  for  the 
theory  of  baptism  by  immersion  only. 

90  A.  A.  Clemens  Alexandrinus,  who  lived  still 
nearer  to  the  Apostles,  calls  wetting  with  tears  baptism, 
lleferring  to  a  backslider,  whom  John  was  the  means  of 
reclaiming,  he  says:  "He  was  baptized  a  second  time 
with  tears."  He  also  uses  the  words  hajjtlzo  and  lavo 
interchangeably.'!" 

*  De  Peuitcntia  c.  G,  De  Bapt.  n.  4,  cited  by  Kcnrick. 
f  Pond  33,  cited  by  Hall,  p.  9G. 


TESTIMONY  OF  HISTORY.  363 

40  A.  A.  Justin  Martyr,  born  in  the  Apostolic  age, 
writing  to  the  Roman  emperor  in  behalf  of  Christians, 
invariably  describes  baptism  by  the  terms  ?^ovu,  to  wash, 
and  Tiovtpov,  washing.  But  those  words  apply  to  no 
particular  mode  of  washing — least  of  all,  to  an  indis- 
pensable immersion.  Now  did  Justin  intend  to  mislead 
the  emperor,  or  did  he  mean  to  describe  baptism  accor- 
ding to  the  ordinary  interpretation  of  such  terms  as  he 
used,  and  which  would  leave  the  mode  undefined  ?  The 
nearest  approach  to  mode  such  terms  convey,  is  that  of 
applying  the  water  to  the  subject — not  the  subject  to 
the  water. 

Further,  when  Justin  writes  to  the  Jews,  (in  his  dia- 
logue with  Trypho,)  he  uses  the  words  BarttC^oi  and  Ww 
interchangeably,  as  meaning  the  same  thing.  Does  not 
this  prove  that  he  did  not  use  it  as  a  specific  term,  and  did 
not  confine  it  to  an  exclusive  mode,  and,  therefore,  used 
it  as  Christians  generally  use  it  at  the  present  day  ? 

Thus,  Apostolic  men,  and  the  Apostles,  used  the 
word  BAPTIZE  in  a  generic  sense,  admitting  baptism  in 
different  ways,  which  has  been  practically  exemplified 
by  the  Church  in  every  age  since.  Therefore,  examina- 
tion of  the  use  of  the  word  Baptize  by  the  Apostles  and 
their  successors — the  figurative  language  associated  with 
it — the  doctrine  and  practice  of  the  Church  in  every  age 
after  the  Apostles — instead  of  leading  to  the  exclusive 
mode  of  immersion,  all  unite  in  testifying  to  the  liberty 
of  baptizing  by  difi'erent  modes. 

What  was  the  most  usual  mode  practiced  by  the  Apos- 
tles themselves  and  their  immediate  successors,  is  involved 
in  much  obscurity.     The  error  of  looking  for  correspon- 


364  TESTIMONY  OF  HISTORY. 

dencies,  and  rendering  literally  the  figurative  language  of 
the  Apostles,  commenced  before  the  last  of  them  had 
left  the  stage  of  action.  And  nothing  connected  with 
our  Holy  religion  was  more  magnified  than  the  oflBce 
and  effects  of  baptism.  Anointing  the  baptized  with  oil 
was  practiced  immediately  after,  if  not  before,  the  death 
of  St.  John,*  making  literal  the  words  of  the  Apostle — 
"He  who  hath  anointed  us  is  God."  (2  Cor.  i.  21.) 
Which  was  accompanied  with  the  sign  of  the  cross  on 
the  forehead,  as  crucified  with  Christ.  (Gal.  ii.  10  and 
20.)  Next,  the  tongues  of  the  baptized  were  touched 
with  milk  and  honey,  in  token  of  their  new  birth,t  as 
the  food  of  "new  born  babes,"  (1  Peter  ii.  2,)  and  also 
in  token  of  "refusing  the  evil  and  choosing  the  good," 
(Isaiah  vii.  15.)  And  putting  off  their  clothes^  to  be 
baptized, J  to  represent  putting  off  the  "old  man"  of 
sin ;  and  putting  on  white  linen  after  baptism,  as  the 
emblem  of  the  "new  man"  in  Christ.  (Eph.  iv.  22-24.) 

And  so  baptism  by  trine  immersion,  as  the  symbol  of 
a  burial,  (Rom.  vi.  4,)  and  in  honor  of  the  three  persons 
in  the  Trinity.  All  of  which  were  in  vogue  at  an  early 
period,  and  had  their  origin  probably  about  the  same 
time — they  certainly  followed  each  other  in  quick  suc- 
cession.§ 

Now,  at  a  period  when  to  every  figure  was  given  a 
literal  correspondence,  it  was  natural  to  look  for  one  in 
the  Apostle's   allusion  to  a  burial  in   connection  with 

*  Const.  Apost.  lib.  7,  cap.  47. 

t  Tertul.  dc  Coron.  Mil.  c.  3. 

X  See  Bingham  and  Wall,  and  their  various  authorities. 

2  Ibid. 


TESTIMONY  OF  HISTORY.  365 

baptism  ;  and  hence,  easy  to  add  to  the  emblem  of  puri- 
fying that  of  Christ's  burial  and  resurrection,  and  to 
change  the  usual  mode  into  immersion,  to  correspond ; 
and  then  into  trine  immersion,  in  honor  of  the  Trinity. 
And  all  these  having  been  introduced  at  so  early  a  pe- 
riod, the  absence  of  further  information  leaves  much 
room  for  conjecture  in  regard  to  the  changes  made  in 
the  mode  or  modes  practiced  by  the  Apostles.  They 
should  surely  teach  us  to  distinguish  between  JEs:ie7itiah 
and  Non- Essentials. 

It  is  remarkable,  that  during  a  period  when  trine  im- 
mersion, with  all  these  addenda,  prevailed  more  gene- 
rally, perhaps,  than  at  any  other,  the  artists  of  that 
time  should  represent  the  baptism  of  Christ  as  standing 
in  the  river,  and  John  pouring  water  on  his  head  with 
a  shell.  The  following  is  a  specimen  of  what  was  com- 
mon in  the  fourth  and  fifth  centuries,  when  but  few  were 
baptized  by  affusion  except  the  feeble  and  the  sick : 

"  This  is  a  representation,  in  mosaic,  of  the  Baptism 
of  Christ  in  Jordan,  preserved  in  the  Church,  in  Cos- 
meden,  at  Ravenna,  which  was  erected  A.  D.  401. 

''In  the  centre  is  Christ  our  Saviour,  in  the  river  Jor- 
dan. On  a  rock  stands  John  the  Baptist ;  in  his  left 
hand  is  a  bent  rod,  and  his  right  hand  holds  a  patera, 
shell,  from  which  he  pours  Avater  on  the  head  of  the 
Redeemer,  over  whom  descends  the  dove,  the  symbol 
of  the  Holy  Ghost,  wdth  expanding  wings,  and  emitting 
rays  of  Grace."— C.  Taylor  Edit.  C.  B.  D. 

Taylor  is  of  opinion  that  such  representations  in  the 
midst  of  a  different  practice,  and  at  a  time  when  "  the 
administration  of  baptism  had  departed  greatly  from  its 

81* 


366 


TESTIMONY  OF  HISTORY. 


CHRIST    BAPTIZED    IN    JORDAN. 


original  simplicity,"  give  stronger  evidence  for  affusion 
than  if  made  at  an  earlier  period.  They  speak  the  lan- 
guage of  a  practice  of  a  former  age  handed  down,  but 
nearly  overrun  by  a  more  imposing  ceremonial. 

He  further  tells  us  that  the  antiquary,  Cimpiani,  rea- 
sons in  regard  to  them  to  the  following  effect:  "In 
these  pictures  we  see  Christ  immersed  in  water,  and 
John  also  pouring  water  on  his  head.  This  raises  a 
doubt  whether  baptism  shall  be  performed  by  immersion 
or  aspersion,  or  by  both.  We  have  also  representations 
of  immersion,  and  the  testimony  of  various  writers." 
Then,  after  referring  to  other  points,  and  after  some  inci- 
dental remarks  in  the  same  connection,  he  concludes :  "  It 
is  beyond  all  doubt  that  the  first  faithful  were  baptized 
wherever  convenience  offered — some  in  rivers,  others  in 


TESTIMONY  OF  HISTORY.  367 

fountains,  others  in  lakes,  others  by  the  sea  shore,  oth- 
ers in  the  sea,  and  others  in  private  houses.  The  mode 
of  baptism  also  differed,  as  is  believed,  insomuch  that 
if  they  were  in  a  place  convenient  for  immersion,  bap- 
tism was  conferred  by  immersion ;  if  they  were  in  a 
place  where  streams,  fountains,  or  other  lesser  waters, 
were  found,  water  was  poured  on  the  head."* 

There  has  been  also  found,  in  the  catacomb  of  Ponti- 
anus,  outside  the  Portese  Gate  at  Rome,  which  was  a 
burial  place  of  the  Martyrs,  under  the  persecutions  of 
Roman  emperors,  a  Baptistry,  in  which  primitive  Chris- 
tians baptized  their  converts,  when  hunted  after  and 
pursued  as  if  wild  beasts,  for  confessing  Christ !  In 
this  subterranean  recess  is  a  small  spring,  and  a  basin  cut 
out  in  the  rock  some  two  feet  deep  and  wide,  from  which 
baptism  was  administered ;  and,  in  the  rock  at  the  end, 
is  sketched  the  baptism  of  Jesus  by  pouring.  This  was 
undoubtedly  a  catacomb  of  Christians  during  the  perse- 
cutions of  Christianity,  for  inscriptions — such  as,  "Who 
received  the  Crown  of  Martyrdom,"  "Who  was  decapi- 
tated"— were  found  visible.  Whilst  further  examination 
has  made  it  evident  that  it  was  resorted  to  for  baptizing 
before  it  was  used  for  a  burial  place.  Now  five  of  these 
persecutions  took  place  before  the  end  of  the  first  cen- 
tury after  the  Apostles,  and  all  of  them  before  the  close 
of  the  next.  So  it  is  fair  to  infer  this  was  a  place  of 
baptism  during  the  first  century  after  the  Apostolic  age, 
and  a  place  of  burial  in  the  second. 

Considering  all  these  facts  in  connection  with  the  ad- 
ditional fact  that  neither  Christ  nor  his  Apostles  pre- 
*  Facts  and  Evidences,  p.  20S. 


368  TESTIMONY  OF  HISTORY. 

scribed  any  specific  mode,  and  the  Holy  Scriptures 
record  no  example  that  defines  the  mode,  much  is  left 
to  conjecture  in  regard  to  the  usual  way  in  which  the 
Apostles  baptized;  and  no  man  should  take  upon  him- 
self to  bind  the  conscience  of  his  brother  in  things 
which  Christ  has  left  free. 

To  limit  baptism  to  immersion  only,  as  Baptist  wri- 
ters propose,  would  restrict  the  application  of  an  ordin- 
ance which  was  evidently  designed  for  God's  people  in 
all  ages  and  under  all  circumstances ;  and  thereby  cut 
off  many  for  whom  it  was  provided  !  In  frozen  regions, 
where  everything  is  bound  up  in  ice  for  a  large  portion 
of  the  year,  and  in  hot,  sandy  countries,  where  water 
can  scarcely  be  obtained  to  sustain  life  for  a  certain 
period,  immersion  would  be  impracticable  for  long  peri- 
ods. So,  in  cases  of  sickness,  dying  women  and  men, 
and  gasping  infants,  under  such  a  law  would  go  into 
eternity  unbaptized,  however  much  the  former  may  de- 
sire it  for  themselves,  and  for  the  latter  it  be  desired 
by  parents  ! 

Our  Saviour,  therefore,  in  this,  as  in  other  things, 
acted  with  his  accustomed  benevolence  in  leaving  to 
circumstances  that  which  he  knew  circumstances  must 
in  many  instances  control,  or  render  inapplicable. 
And  we  confess  that  we  have  no  sympathy  with  those 
who  define  what  God  has  not  defined,  and  then  boast  of 
standing  by  and  seeing  persons  fit  and  desirous  for  bap- 
tism, die  without  it,  because  they  could  not  be  immersed 
all  over  in  water  !*  And  who  further  take  delight  in 
"  cutting  holes  in  the  ice,  while  the  weather  is  so  cold 

*  Hinton's  His.  Bap.  cited  by  Kenrick. 


EXAMINATION  OP  PRINCIPLES.  369 

as  to  keep  several  men  stirring  the  water  with  poles  to 
keep  it  from  freezing,  while  they  are  baptizing  delicate 
women."*  We  have  not  so  learned  Christ,  nor  can 
we  ever  yield  to  such  "  the  liberty  wherewith  Christ  has 
made  us  free,"  and  submit  to  a  bondage  even  more  gall- 
ing, in  such  cases,  than  that  from  which  he  delivered 
us. 

We  have  no  objection  to  immersion,  where  people 
prefer  it,  and  we  are  prepared  to  yield  much  for  the  sake 
of  uniformity  on  this  point  among  Christians ;  for  we 
are  firmly  persuaded  that  our  common  Christianity  has 
suffered  much  from  the  constant  controversy  that  has 
been  so  long  kept  up  on  this  question.  We  are  willing 
even  to  make  immersion  the  common  mode,  if  the  Bap- 
tists, on  the  other  hand,  will  consent  that  the  feeble,  the 
sick,  and  dying,  of  all  ages,  and  under  such  other  cir- 
cumstances that  may  render  immersion  impracticable, 
shall  receive  baptism  in  other  ways.  But  we  can  never 
consent  to  cut  off  one  soul  from  baptism,  by  applying  a 
rule  which  neither  the  word  of  God  nor  any  branch  of 
his  Church  ever  applied,  till  the  rise  of  the  Anabaptists 
in  Germany,  in  the  sixteenth  century.  This  we  dare 
not  do.  Nor  do  we  concede  thus  much  on  the  ground, 
*' immersion  is  the  safer  mode,"  as  certain  persons, 
high  in  office,  are  accustomed  to  call  it,  in  order  to 
proselyte  from  neighboring  churches.  We  protest 
against  this  spirit,  and  the  use  thus  made  of  it,  because 
the  authority  which  they  profess  to  respect  only,  does 
not  authorize  it,  and  many  believe  pouring  to  be  the 
Apostolic  mode.  The  mode  of  baptism  was  not  made 
*  See  Hall,  p.  115. 


370  EXAMINATION  OF  PRINCIPLES. 

an   article  of  faith  when  Pierre  de  Bruys  first  (in  the 
twelfth  century)  refused  to  baptize  children,  because,  as 
he  said,  they  could  not  be  saved.     Nor  was   the  mode 
ever  regarded  as  of  the  essence  of  baptism  before,  or  for 
several  centuries  after  that  period.     Even  in  those  peri- 
ods when    accompanied    with  the    greatest    number  of 
additions  and  most  imposing  display,  it  was  allowed  to 
be   administered  in   its  simplest  form  of  pouring  and 
sprinkling,  in  cases  of  necessity — on  the  sick  lying  on 
their  bed,  and  on  the  infant  embraced  in  the  arms.     If 
we  make  the  mode  of  doing  a  thing,  the  essence  of  the 
thing  itself,  look  at  the  consequences.    We  must  include 
all   the  minutiae  embraced  in   the  manner,   which  will 
oftentimes   extend  to   time,    order,    and   circumstances. 
This  would  confine  the  sacrament  of  the  Lord's  Supper 
to  night,  as  the  time  for  it — to   unleavened  bread,  re- 
ceived in  a  reclining  j^osture,  just  after  a  meal,  in  an 
U2:)per  room,   and   no  females  loresent.     Dispense   with 
any  one  of   these   particulars,  and  you  may  with  all. 
And  when  you  dispense  w^ith  all,  where  is  the  mode? 
Christians    have    dispensed    with    them    all,    and    now 
receive  the  sacrament  of  the   Supper  generally  without 
observing  a  single   one  of  them — which  proves,  beyond 
all  question,  that  mode  is  not  regarded  as  of  the  essence 
of  the  Supper  ;  and  why  should  it  be  of  the  other  sacra- 
ment, baptism  ?  Bread  and  wine,  authoritatively  set  apart 
and  rightly  received,  is  all  that  is  regarded  as  essential 
to  the  Supper,  and  so  water,  authoritatively  applied,  in 
the  name  of  the  Father,  Son,  and   Holy  Ghost,  consti- 
tutes the  essence  of  baptism. 

We  must  look  to  the  end  for  which  things  are  done, 


EXAMINATION  OF  PRINCIPLES.  371 

in  order  to  determine  what  is  essential  to  them,  not  to 
the  manner.  If  a  corporal  washing  was  the  end  of 
baptism,  then  much  water,  and  even  soap,  as  Cyprian 
remarks,  would  be  essential  to  it.  But  the  end  of  bap- 
tism is  a  spiritual,  internal  cleansing,  not  external;  and, 
therefore,  a  small  quantity  of  water  would  as  clearly 
signify  it  as  a  large  quantity — especially  in  an  enlight- 
ened age  and  country.  And  this  again  suggests  to  us 
the  wisdom  of  our  Saviour  in  not  prescribing  to  us  a 
particular  mode ;  for  as  a  sign  and  initiating  rite  into 
things  spiritual,  it  should  be  adapted  to  all  conditions, 
places  and  circumstances,  to  teach  and  admonish  men ; 
and  in  an  advanced  stage  of  civilization,  a  small  quan- 
tity of  water  and  a  more  convenient  mode  would  as 
strikingly  set  forth  the  object,  as  a  more  imposing  mode 
could  do  upon  a  rude  age  and  an  obstinate  people. 

Therefore,  if  it  could  be  proved,  (which  it  cannot,) 
that  the  Apostles  usually  immersed  in  baptism,  inas- 
much as  no  command  to  baptize  by  that  mode,  or  in 
any  other  particular  way  is  given,  it  does  not  follow 
that  we  should  confine  ourselves  to  that  mode,  when  a 
less  inconvenient  mode  would  have  all  the  influence 
upon  a  refined  and  enlightened  age,  that  plunging  and 
Avashing  of  the  whole  body  would  have  on  a  ruder  age. 
Further,  if  we  are  to  imitate  in  this  age  the  example  of 
those  ages  in  which  it  is  known  immersion  was  gene- 
rally practised,  we  must  be  baptized  naked.  Is  that 
necessary  in  this  age?  It  is  as  well  known  that  people 
were  baptized  naked  in  early  times,  as  it  is  that  they 
were  immersed.  Both  stand  on  the  same  authorit^^ 
Wall  says — "  The  ancient  Christians,  when  they  were 


372  EXAMINATION  OF  PRINCIPLES. 

baptized  by  immersion  were  all  baptized  iiahecl;  whether 
thej  were  men,  w^omen,  or  children."*  And  Robinson, 
who  was  deputed  by  the  Baptists  of  England  to  write 
a  history  of  Baptism,  acknowledges  this  fact.  He  says, 
(chap.  XV.)  "  The  primitive  Christians  baptized  naked. 
Nothing  easier  than  to  give  proofs  of  this,  by  quotations 
from  authentic  writings  of  the  men  who  administered 
baptism,  and  who  certainly  know  in  what  way  they 
themselves  performed  it.  There  is  no  ancient  histori- 
cal fact  better  authe7iticated  than  this.  The  evidence 
doth  not  go  on  the  meaning  of  the  single  word  naked, 
for  then  the  reader  might  suspect  allegory,  but  on 
many  facts  reported,  and  many  reasons  assigned  for 
the  practice." 

Will  any  one  insist  on  our  follov/ing  out  the  mode  of 
baptism  in  this  particular  ?  And  if  we  have  the  discre- 
tion allowed  us  to  omit  washing  the  naked  body,  then 
may  we  not  have  the  same  discretion  about  breaking 
through  the  ice  and  plunging  under  the  freezing  water 
the  feeble  and  delicate  body?  And  if  we  have  the 
discretion  to  postpone  such  baptisms,  and  they  die 
unbaptized,  which  involves  the  greater  responsibility, 
to  baptize  them  by  pouring,  (which  to  them  would  be 
as  impressive  and  instructive  as  dipping,)  or  to  permit 
them  to  die  unbaptized?  What  says  the  Lord? — "I 
will  have  mercy,  and  not  sacrifice." 

Again,  the  baptized  were  anointed  with  oil,  milk  and 
honey  put  on  their  tongues,  white  garments  put  on  and 
worn  eight  days,  and  other  things  added  afterwards. 
AYere  all  these  of  the  essence  of  the  sacrament  ?     Can 

^  Wall's  Hist.  Bap.  vol.  ii.  p.  379. 


EXAMINATION  OF  PRINCIPLES.  373 

we  dispense  with  none  of  them?  And  if  any,  why  not 
all — the  trine  immersion  and  single  immersion — if  in 
our  discretion  we  think  best  ?  for  none  of  them  are  com- 
manded in  the  Holy  Scriptures.  We  are  commanded  to 
baptize,  but  in  no  particular  mode;  and  water  applied  in 
the  name  of  the  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost,  being 
alone  of  the  essence  of  baptism,  it  is  left  to  our  discre- 
tion to  apply  it  in  that  way  which  time  and  circum- 
stances will  m.ake  it  redound  most  to  the  honor  and 
glory  of  God. 

"But,"  says  Mr.  Booth,  "positive  institutions  admit 
of  no  degrees,  no  supplements,  and  no  commutation. 
It  is  the  will  of  God  for  the  trial  of  our  obedience:  nor 
will  he  allow  us  to  inquire  why  or  how?  Compliance 
MUST  be  so,  and  NO  more,  and  no  less,  and  NO  other- 
wise. What  we  call  little  things,  trifling  deviations, 
are  the  pins  and  screws  which  hold  the  sacred  taber- 
nacle together:  take  these  away,  the  whole  edifice  falls. 
The  same  rash  hand  that  makes  one  alteration,  may 
make  twenty;  if  in  small  things,  why  not  in  greater? 
till  at  length  the  foundation  is  destroyed;  Christianity 
is  superseded;  superstition  takes  its  place,  and  all  is 
death,  desolation  and  darkness."''' 

How  much  sophistry  is  here  clothed  under  the  appli- 
cation of  correct  principles  to  false  premises !  The 
immersionist  has  no  right  to  dispense  with  the  oil,  and 
milk,  and  honey,  and  nakedness  of  recipients  in  bap- 
tism :  these  are  the  ^^pins  and  screws  that  hold  the 
sacred  tabernacle  to^rether,"  accordino;  to  such  reason- 
ing.  The  scriptures  teach  no  mode,  and  therefore  he 
*  Booth's  Paedo.  Exam.,  v.^l.  i. 

32 


374  EXAMINATION  OE  PEINCIPLES. 

can  adopt  no  mode,  and  hence  cannot  baptize  at  all,  is 
the  legitimate  deduction  from  his  own  principles,  when 
applied  to  the  scriptures,  as  he  intended  to  apply  them. 
Reductio  absurdum.  Apply  them  to  the  other  sacra- 
ment, as  he  designed  they  should  be  applied  to  baptism : 
the  supper  was  instituted,  as  before  remarked,  at  night, 
in  an  upper  room,  received  in  a  reclining  posture,  after 
a  meal,  and  no  female  present.  He  tells  us — ''  Com- 
pliance MUST  be  so,  and  no  more,  and  no  less,  and  no 
OTHERWISE."  If  you  neglect  these  "pins  and  screws, 
the  tabernacle  will  fall."  Has  he  neglected  not  one  of 
them,  and  done  every  thing  just  so,  7io  more,  no  less,  7io 
otherwise?  Alas!  how  easily  does  poor  human  nature 
deceive  itself!  In  the  Sacrament  of  the  Supper,  the 
Baptists  as  well  as  others,  have  departed  from  every 
one  of  these  particulars,  and  regard  no  part  of  the 
mode  or  manner  in  which  the  last  supper  was  received, 
as  essential  to  the  sacrament,  beyond  the  elements 
lawfully  administered.  And  why  not  apply  the  same 
principle  to  baptism,  and  distinguish  between  things 
essential  and  not  essential? 

We  are  sometimes  told  that  three  modes  of  baptizing 
would  make  three  baptisms !  To  this  we  should  not 
stop  to  reply,  were  it  not,  in  the  next  breath,  pro- 
claimed, "One  Lord,  one  faith,  one  baptism;"  as  if 
different  modes  conflicted  with  this  formula  of  doctrine. 
Therefore  we  reply,  that  different  modes  of  doing  a 
thing  do  not  alter  the  thing  itself.  The  same  letter 
may  be  written  whilst  standing  or  sitting.  We  may  go 
to  the  same  place  by  different  ways.  A  lady  may  dress 
herself  in  a  half  dozen  costumes  during  the  same  day, 


EXAMINATION  OF  PNINCIPLES.  375 

and  she  will  still  be  the  same  lady.  Three  men  may 
wash  their  hands  at  the  same  time  and  for  the  same 
object,  one  at  the  pump,  another  in  the  river,  and  the 
third  in  a  basin,  and  all  three  attain  one  and  the  same 
end,  to  wit,  the  cleansing  of  their  hands.  And  so  we 
may  baptize  in  three  ways  for  the  same  end,  i.  e,  the 
internal  cleansing  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  If  different  de- 
grees and  phases  constitute  the  essence  of  a  thing,  then 
we  have  many  more  faiths  than  we  have  baptisms ;  for 
no  two  Christians,  perhaps,  have  precisely  the  same 
degrees  and  shades  of  belief  in  all  the  doctrines  of  the 
gospel. 

It  is  the  end  and  unity  of  design  that  make  our  bap- 
tism one  and  our  faith  one,  and  our  Lord  one ;  for 
without  these  we  may  even  have  different  Lords  under 
the  same  name.  Unity  of  mode  would  not  make  one 
baptism,  for  we  may  give  different  baptisms  by  the  same 
mode.  When  the  disciples  at  Ephesus,  who  had  been 
baptized  unto  John's  baptism,  were  again  baptized  by 
St.  Paul,*  (if  in  the  same  mode,)  they  received  two  bap- 
tisms, and  yet  by  one  mode.  Therefore,  mode  cannot 
constitute  oneness.  But  baptism  once  administered  in 
unity  of  name  and  design  into  the  great  body  of  Christ's 
people,  is  one  baptism,  in  whatever  way  given. 

Herein  seems  to  be  the  cause  of  much  of  the  error 
of  immersionists :  they  lose  sight  of  the  great  end  of 
the  Institutions  of  the  Gospel,  and  magnify  incidental 
matters  into  undue  importance,  thereby  destroying  the 
proportions  of  the  grand  system  of  Christianity. 

Again ;    they  deceive   themselves   by  the    sound  of 

*  Acts  xix. 


376  EXAMINATION  OF  PRINCIPLES. 

words;  they  often  boast — "We  take  the  Bible  alone 
for  our  guide ;"  but  put  their  own  interpretation  upon 
it.  This  interpretation  is  opposed  by  greater  numbers 
of  equal  learning  ;  and  what  is  the  result  ?  Thev  reject 
the  practice  and  light  of  the  next  age  after  the  Apostles, 
and  attempt  to  force  upon  all  others  their  opinions. 
But  here  they  deceive  themselves,  for  they  always  act 
on  the  testimony  of  history,  when  it  helps  a  peculiar 
view,  without  seeming  to  be  aware  of  it.  They  cannot 
find  an  undoubted  example  of  immersion^  nor  precept  for 
it,  in  the  Holy  Scriptures;  and  yet  they  say  it  was 
practiced  for  many  centuries.  But  ought  not  candor  to 
require  the  admission,  that,  according  to  the  same  au- 
thority, other  modes  have  always  existed  too,  and  that 
infant  baptism  had  been  the  practice  of  the  Christian 
Church  in  every  age  since  the  Apostles  ?  It  is  easy  to 
use  high  sounding  words,  and  claim  a  religion  without  a 
history ;  but  for  those  who  would  rescue  Christianity  from 
the  snares  of  Infidelity,  and  search  out  the  ways  of  truth, 
labor  and  caution,  with  all  the  means  which  are  put  in 
their  power,  should  be  employed.  It  would  be  wanting  in 
candor  in  us,  not  to  admit  immersion  was  in  use  (not 
exclusively)  for  a  long  period.  But  when  first  referred 
to  in  history,  it  was  connected  with  other  things,  which 
give  room  for  doubt  whether  it  was  the  first  practice 
among  Christians.  For  instance,  it  is  difficult  to  per- 
suade ourselves  that  the  first  Christians  were  baptized 
naked.  Yet  there  is  a  difficulty  in  reconciling  even 
John's  baptism  with  immersion^  and  not  allow  the  fact. 
If  the  crowds  baptized  in  Jordan,  were  immersed  under 
the  water,  we  have  to  choose  between  the  probability, 


EXAMINATION  OF  PRINCIPLES.  37T 

that  thousands  who  went  to  see  and  hear  John,  carried 
extra  clothing  with  them  for  baptism,  which  is  very  im- 
p?'obable,  or  that  they  were  immersed  nude. 

It  is  not  unreasonable  to  suppose,  that  at  first,  peo- 
ple were  baptized  by  John,  standing  in  the  water,  by  the 
mode  indicated  for  the  baptism  of  the  Holy  Ghost, 
which  w^as  afterwards  changed,  as  were  many  other 
things,  to  give  a  literal  meaning  to  figurative  language. 
Or,  we  may  adopt  the  idea  that  immersion  of  the  naked 
body  was  usual  when  circumstances  allowed  it,  and  that 
Christians  were  indulged  in  chrism,  and  other  things, 
according  to  the  taste  of  the  age;  any  and  all  of  ivliich 
we  may  use  or  dispense  with,  according  to  our  discre- 
tion. And  in  the  place  of  immersion,  and  nakedness, 
and  oil,  and  the  cross,  substitute,  if  we  choose,  clothing 
and  pouring,  and  the  cross,  without  oil ;  or  omit  the 
cross  altogether,  and  apply  the  water  in  the  name  of 
the  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost,  in  any  way  that  we 
think  w^ill  comport  with  the  dignity  of  the  sacrament. 

This  will  be  making  the  proper  distinction  between 
the  essence  of  baptism,  and  what  is  merely  incidental. 
Water,  in  the  rigJit  name,  by  j^roper  autliority,  are  all 
that  is  of  the  essence  of  baptism ;  as  it  is  acknowledged 
even  by  Baptists,  that  bread  and  wijie,  with  like  autho- 
rity, are  all  that  is  of  the  essence  of  the  Supper — objec- 
tively considered.  If  we  think  it  is  no  longer  necessary 
to  apply  water  to  the  naked  body,  and,  therefore,  bap- 
tize it  clothed,  may  we  not  omit  also  the  inconvenient 
and  often  inappropriate  mode  of  submerging  ?  In 
this  age,  it  does  not  require  much  water  to  symbolize 
cleansing ;  and  the  Lord's  Supper  frequently  received, 

32* 


o78  EXAMINATION  OF  PRINCIPLES. 

impresses  us  much  more  seriously  with  the  crucifixion 
and  death  of  our  Saviour  than  baptism  by  immersion 
can  do.  And  it  was  for  that  especial  end  the  Supper 
was  instituted — for  the  remembrance  of  that  very  thing, 
we  are  commanded  to  observe  it.  Whilst  baptism  was 
commanded  to  be  given  in  the  name  of  the  Trinity — 
not  of  the  death  of  the  Son. 

There  is  a  passage  in  the  ''Apostolic  Canons,"  as 
they  are  called,  written  by  some  unknown  author  or 
authors,  at  a  very  early  date,  and  perhaps  about  the 
time  the  doctrine  was  first  introduced  that  baptism 
represented  a  burial^  (and  hence  followed  by  trine  immer- 
sion,) which  says:  "Jesus  did  not  say,  '•baptize  in  my 
death;'  but  '  Go,  teach  all  nations,  baptizing  them  in 
the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the 
Holy  Ghost.'  "*  This  w^ould  seem  to  imply  that  baptism 
was  then  being  represented  as  something  to  imitate 
Christ's  death  or  burial,  and  the  writer  was  opposed  to 
the  doctrine. 

We  further  know  deaconesses  were  appointed  to 
attend  to  the  females,  and  have  them  in  readiness  in 
the  water,  in  a  place  by  themselves,  and  to  notify  the 
minister  when  to  come  to  administer  the  baptism.  And 
as  soon  as  baptisteries  were  formed,  a  partition  wall  was 
made,  to  separate  the  male  and  female  apartments,  for 
the  purpose  of  rendering  the  baptism  of  each  sex  as  pri- 
vate as  possible.  This  proves  that  a  sense  of  female 
delicacy  then  existed  as  well  as  now ;  and  hence  increa- 
ses the  improbability  that  immersion  was   practiced  in 

■*  Can.  Apost.  1,  cited  by  Kenrick. 


EXAMINATION  OF  PRINCIPLES.  .  379 

public  till  about  the  time  referred  to,  as  it  must  stand  or 
fall  with  naked  subjects. 

Sozomen,  in  the  beginning  of  the  fourth  century, 
gives  an  account  of  an  outrage  of  certain  soldiers  in 
the  Church  of  Chrvsostom,  in  Constantinople,  on  Easter 
eve,  when,  he  says  :  "  There  was  a  great  tumult  at  the 
font,  the  women  shrieking  in  affright,  and  the  children 
crying,  the  priests  and  deacons  were  beaten  and  forced 
to  run  away,  with  their  vestments  on."* 

Chrysostom  complains  of  the  same  thing  to  Innocent, 
and  says :  "  The  women,  who  had  undressed  themselves 
to  be  baptized,  were  forced,  by  fright  of  this  violence, 
to  run  away  naked,"  &c.t 

Now  we  are  left  to  choose  between  pouring  first  and 
immersion  afterwards,  or  immersion  from  the  beginning, 
ivith  naked  subjects.  We  cannot  appeal  to  history  for 
one  thing,  and  reject  it  in  another.  With  immersion, 
we  must  admit  naked  subjects,  the  liberty  of  baptism  in 
other  modes,  and  infant  baptism  in  every  age  of  the 
Church.  This,  certain  writers  clearly  see,  and  hence 
the  attempt  to  throw  aside  history  altogether.  But  this 
cannot  be  done,  unless  w^e  intend  to  remain  in  ignorance 
on  important  points,  and  surrender  the  Divine  authority 
of  our  holy  religion.  And  in  appealing  to  the  Greek 
Church  for  immersion,  as  is  often  done,  we  can  appeal 
to  it  also  for  infant  baptism,  and  the  liberty  to  bap- 
tize by  aspersion,  in  cases  of  necessity.  But  what  is 
the  immersion  of  the  Greek  Church  ?  "  The  infant  is 
placed  in  the  baptismal  vase,  with  its  face  downward, 
supported  by  the  left  arm  of  the  priest,  who,  with  his 
*  Wall,  vol  ii.  p.  380.  f  Ibid. 


380  EXAMINATION  OF  PRINCIPLES. 

right  hand,  pours  water  on  it."*  Such  is  the  immer- 
sion of  the  Greeks.  It  is  part  pouring,  applied  to  in- 
fants, and  only  the  pouring  required,  if  necessity  de- 
mands it. 

What  is  the  immersion  of  all  the  East?  A  few  years 
ago,  when  the  bishop  of  Ooroomiah,  in  Media,  Asia — Mar 
Yohannan — visited  this  country,  he  was  asked  particu- 
larly how  he  baptized  ?  His  reply  was,  "  We  baptize 
children  by  putting  them  in  the  font,  in  a  sitting  posture^ 
up  to  the  breast  in  tvater,  facing  the  East — then  pouring 
water  on  them,  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  Son,  and 
Holy  Ghost. "t  And  he  further  added,  "  Such  is  th.e 
kind  of  immersion  practiced  all  over  the  East,  at  all  pe- 
riods." What  shall  we  say  to  the  noise  we  hear  about 
Greek  immersion,  and  immersion  in  the  far-off  East  ? 
Is  it  immersion,  or  is  it  pouring  ?  would  it  be  complete 
if  there  was  no  pouring?  Is  it,  in  every  sense,  an  im- 
mersion according  to  the  common  Baptist  mode  of 
plunging  people  entirely  under  water  ?  And,  worst  of 
all,  infants  are  the  chief  subjects!  Will  it  satisfy  our 
Baptist  brethren,  if  we  place  our  little  ones  in  a  font,  up 
to  the  waist  in  water,  and  then  pour  water  on  them,  in 
the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the 
Holy  Ghost  ?  Oh  no.  This  would  be  "baby  sprinkling," 
after  all !  It  would  not  be  a  burial.  And  their  own 
good  sense  would  further  teach  them  that,  if  they  were 

*  Euchologium,  with  Gear's  Notes,  cited  by  Kenrick. 

f  Note.  The  author  is  indebted  for  the  above  to  the  Rev.  H.  W. 
DuoACHBT,  D.  D.,  of  Philadelphia,  to  whom  the  Bishop  also  remarked, 
that  he  had  never  seen  an  adult  baptized.  So  long  had  infant  bap- 
tism been  universal. 


SUMMARY.  381 

nicely  washed  by  their  mothers  at  home,  before  brought 
to  the  font,  and  the  water  there  devoutly  poured  on  them 
in  the  name  of  the  Trinity,  it  could  not  make  much  dif- 
ference whether  they  were  set  down  in  the  font  or  not. 

In  the  absence  of  prescribed  law,  we  may  exercise 
that  discretion,  that  circumstances,  in  unison  with  Gos- 
pel liberty,  shall  seem  to  make  expedient.  And  we 
must  also  distinguish  between  the  things  essential  and 
not  essential.  As  to  ivater  and  the  subjects^  they  are 
essentials.  As  to  modes,  with  all  their  addenda,  they 
are  non-essentials,  and  may  be  retained,  rejected,  or 
modified,  as  the  age  and  the  prosperity  of  Christ's  king- 
dom seem  to  require. 

1.  We  have  now  seen  baptism  administered  by  day 
and  by  night,  in  sickness  and  in  health — the  subject 
standing  by  the  font,  and  kneeling  by  the  font — stand- 
ing in  the  water,  and  kneeling  in  the  water — sitting  in 
the  water,  and  held  in  the  arm  of  the  minister  in  the 
water — in  prison,  and  on  his  bed,  and  by  dipping  in 
various  ways ;  and  all  recognized  by  the  Christian 
Church  as  valid  baptism.  What  does  all  this  teach, 
but  the  non-essential  character  of  modes,  and  liberty 
allowed  in  such  things. 

2.  Neither  the  Holy  Scriptures,  nor  the  Church  in 
the  following  ages,  authorize  any  man  or  set  of  men 
to  confine  baptism  exclusively  to  immersion,  or  to  any 
other  mode. 

3.  Neither  does  the  application  of  the  term  Baptize, 
in  the  New  Testament,  or  its  use  in  the  next  age  after 
the  Apostles,  authorize  its  translation  into  immerse 
only. 


382  SUMMARY. 

4.  Nor  has  any  one  the  authority  to  say  to  his  brother, 
You  are  commanded  to  be  immersed ;  for  neither  Christ 
nor  his  Apostles  prescribed  any  particular  mode ;  and 
example,  if  he  had  it,  would  authorize,  on  the  same 
principle,  the  reply.  You  are  commanded  to  receive 
the  Lord's  Supper  reclining  at  a  table,  and  only  at 
night. 

We  should  "stand  fast,  therefore,  in  the  liberty 
wherewith  Christ  hath  made  us  free."  Taking  the  Bi- 
ble as  our  guide,  supported  and  sustained  by  the  prac- 
tice of  the  Church  in  every  age,  we  cannot  go  far 
wrong.  With  this  authority,  we  may  bring  all  our 
little  ones  into  covenant  with  God,  and  seal  it  by  bap- 
tizing them  in  that  mode  which  we  believe  will  comport 
most  with  the  dignity  of  the  sacrament,  and  the  glory 
of  God  through  Christ. 


CHAPTER  XII. 


HISTORY  OF  THE  BAPTIST  CHURCH  EXAMINED. 

Modern  Organization — Waldenses  and  their  Faith — Albigenses — Pierre  De 
Bruys — Cathari — Paterini — Paulicians — Bulgari  Donatists — Novatians 
— Bede — Pelagius — Ancient  Church  of  Briton — Rome — Greece — Alexan- 
dria— Palestine — Coast  of  Malabar — Rise  of  Antipedobaptists  in  Twelfth 
Century — Collected  together  in  1521 — Munster  taken  in  1533 — Retaken 
next  year — Anabaptists  Scattered — Rallied  under  Manol536 — Confession 
of  Faith  published  1636— Fifst  Church  in  England  1638— In  America 
1639 — Present  position  and  Concluding  Remarks. 

Having  considered  the  peculiar  views  of  Baptists  in 
regard  to  the  subjects  and  modes  of  baptism,  we  will 
examine  their  rise  and  progress  as  a  church.  They  do 
not  claim  for  themselves  great  antiquity  as  an  organized 
body  under  their  present  name,  but  contend  that  their 
principles  have  been  entertained  in  the  Church  of  God 
in  every  age. 

And  some  oT  them  profess  to  be  able  to  trace  them 
through  diflferent  sects  or  branches  of  the  church  to  an 
early  period.  They  tell  us  the  Waldenses  held  similar 
views,  and  that  they  were  also  advocated  among  the 
Cathari  in  Germany,  the  Paterines  in  Italy,  and  Pauli- 
cians in  Greece.  And  before  them  by  the  Donatists  in 
Africa,  and  even  the  Novatians  at  Rome.* 


384  EXAMINATION  OF  THE  ORIGIN  AND 

Let  us  examine  the  facts  in  the  case.  The  Waldenses 
were  a  body  of  Christians  inhabiting  the  valleys  of  the 
Alps,  brought  to  light  in  the  twelfth  century.  They 
were  an  exemplary  people  for  the  age  in  which  they 
lived,  and  advocated  some  of  the  principles  of  the  Refor- 
mation. They  were  called  the  "Vaudois,  Yallenses, 
Waldenses  and  tlie  i^eople  of  the  valleys.'''^  They  had 
been  in  existence  as  a  religious  sect,  as  it  appears, 
several  centuries  before  the  preaching  of  Peter  Waldo 
commenced.  He  visited  Piedmont  about  the  year  1160, 
and  there  found  churches  holding  sentiments  similar  to 
those  he  had  preached  at  Lyons,  and  became  renowned 
among  them  as  a  friend  and  ally.  Some  have  supposed 
they  were  called  after  his  name  (Waldo)  Waldenses. 
But  it  has  of  later  years  been  shown  to  be  the  more 
probable,  that  they  were  called  after  the  place  they 
inhabited.  And  after  their  union  with  the  disciples  of 
the  Lyonese  reformer,  they  obtained  for  themselves  also 
the  name  of  Lionist,  thereby  blending  with  them  the 
Christians  of  Lyons. f 

The  Waldenses  were  generally  an  exemplary  people, 
and  opposed  to  many  of  the  doctrines  of  the  Church  of 
Rome.  But  did  they  oppose  infant  baptism,  or  denounce 
all  baptisms  besides  immersion  ?  These  are  the  points 
that  distinguish  Baptists  from  other  Christians.  And 
who  is  to  give  us  a  better  account  of  their  faith,  than 
themselves?  When  their  adversaries  and  persecutors, 
the  Romish  priests,  falsely  accused  them,  among  other 
things,  of  refusing  baptism  to  children,  they  denied  the 

*  Dr.  AUix's  History  of  the  Church  of  Piedmont. 
f  Waddington's  Church  History. 


HISTORY  OF  THE  BAPTIST  CHURCH.  385 

charge.  But  they  acknowledged  that  some  of  their 
children  went  longer  without  baptism  than  they  desired, 
because  their  own  pastors  or  Barbs  Avere  abroad  in  the  ser- 
vice of  the  Church,  and  they  detested  the  human  inven- 
tions added  to  the  sacrament  by  the  Romish  priests,  and 
hence  deferred  the  baptism  of  their  children  oftentimes 
longer  than  was  desirable,  awaiting  the  return  of  their 
own  Barbs.*  In  an  ancient  record  among  them,  called 
the  "  Spiritual  Almanac,"  they  acquit  themselves  of 
this  accusation  as  follows: — 

"  Neither  is  the  time  or  place  appointed  for  those  who 
must  be  baptized ;  but  charity  and  the  edification  of  the 
Church  and  congregation  ought  to  be  the  rule  in  this 
matter;  yet  notwithstanding  we  bring  our  children  to 
be  baptized,  which  they  ought  to  do  to  whom  they  are 
most  nearly  related,  as  their  parents,  or  those  whom 
God  has  inspired  with  such  a  charity." 

In  this  they  declare,  they  bring  their  children  to  bap- 
tism, and  point  out  the  persons  who  ought  to  bring  them. 

In  their  articles  of  rules  of  faith  and  practice,  adopted 
by  all  the  Waldenses  assembled  at  Angrogne,  September 
12th,  1535,  their  seventeenth  article  reads  as  follows: — 

Art.  xvii.  "As  to  the  sacraments,  it  has  been  deter- 
mined by  the  Holy  Scriptures,  that  we  have  but  two 
sacramental  signs  or  symbols,  which  Christ  Jesus  hath 
left  unto  us:  the  one  is  baptism,  the  other  the jEucha7'ist, 
or  Lord's  Supper,  which  we  receive  to  demonstrate  our 
perseverance  in  the  faith,  according  to  the  promise  we 
made  in  our  baptism  in  our  infancy  ;  as  also  in  remem- 
brance of  that  great  benefit  which  Jesus  Christ  hath 

*  See  Perrin's  History  of  the  Waldenses. 

33 


386  EXAMINATION  OF  THE  ORIGIN  AND 

conferred  upon  us,  when  he  laid  down  his  life  for  our 
redemption,  cleansing  us  with  his  most  precious  blood."* 

This  article  shows,  that  so  general  was  the  practice  of. 
infant  baptism  among  them  and  their  forefathers,  that 
their  whole  assembly  had  been  baptized  in  infancy ;  or 
at  least  so  nearly  all,  that  they  speak  of  their  baptism 
as  received  only  at  that  time.  "According  to  the  pro- 
mise we  made  in  our  baptism  in  our  infancy."  All  their 
descendants  practice  infant  baptism  to  this  day.  Nor  is 
there  a  single  word  in  their  whole  liistory,  that  indicates 
they  ever  denied  it  to  young  children,  if  we  will  distin- 
guish properly  when  different  names  are  used. 

The  name  Waldenses  was  first  applied  only  to  the 
Christians  in  the  valleys  between  the  Alps,  who  opposed 
the  Romish  Church.  The  name  Albigenses  was  applied 
to  those  in  the  southern  parts  of  France,  who  (about  the 
same  time)  opposed,  also,  the  Church  of  Rome.  But 
some  of  these  sects,  though  united  against  Rome,  differed 
widely  among  themselves  on  other  points. f 

"Albi,  a  city  of  Languedoc,  in  France,"  says  Wad- 
dington,  "  was  peculiarly  prolific  in  heresies  about  that 
time."  All  those  sects  known  by  the  name  of  Albi- 
genses, and  also  others  in  the  northern  parts  of  Italy, 
are  frequently,  by  writers  in  later  and  succeeding  ages, 
included  under  the  general  name  of  Waldenses,  though 
widely  differing  in  various  particulars — just  as  the  name 
Protestant  is  now  frequently  applied  to  all  who  do  not 
belong  to  the  Church  of  Rome.  Or  of  Presbyterian  to 
all  who  adopt  their  kind  of  Church  government ;  or 
Arminian  to  all  that   oppose  Calvinism.      But  who  in 

*  Perrin  and  Du  Pin.  f  Ibid. 


HISTORY  OF  THE  BAPTIST  CHURCH.  387 

this  day  would  charge  all  the  erroneous  doctrines  among 
Protestants  to  any  of  the  respectable  bodies  of  Chris- 
tians that  come  under  that  name  ?  Or  charge  Presby- 
terians proper,  with  all  the  errors  of  many  others  who 
adopt  the  same  kind  of  church  government?*  Owing 
to  this  loose  way  of  writing — not  distinguishing  between 
the  Waldenses  proper,  and  other  sects  incorrectly  em- 
braced under  the  term,  many  have  been  led  into  the 
erroneous  opinion  that  the  Waldenses  denied  infant  bap- 
tism !     But  their  own  works  prove  the  contrary. 

"It  is  a  well  known  fact,"  says  Dr.  Murdock,  in  a 
note  on  Mosheim,  vol.  iii.  p.  228,  "  that  in  the  sixteenth 
century,  the  genuine  descendants  of  the  old  Waldenses, 
Wickliffites,  and  Hussites,  who  were  numerous  in  France, 
England,  &c.,  readily  united  with  the  Lutheran  and  the 
reformed  communities,  and  at  length  became  absorbed 
in  them ;  and  that  very  few,  if  any  of  them,  ever  mani- 
fested a  preference  for  the  Mennonite,  or  for  any  of  the 
Antipedobaptistf  sects  of  that  age."  ....  "And  if  we 
endeavor  to  trace  the  history  of  that  grand  peculiarity 
of  all  Mennonites,  their  confining  baptism  to  adult 
believers,  and  rejecting  infant  baptism  altogether,  we 
shall  find,  that  at  the  time  Menno  first  embraced  it,  it 
existed  among  the  numerous  German  Anabaptists,  but 
not  among  the  Waldenses  of  France  or  Bohemia,  who 
were  then  universally  believers  in  infant  baptism."  .... 
"  These  Waldensian  Pedobaptists,  moreover,  declared  that 
they  held  the  same  belief  which  their  fathers  had  main- 
tained for  several  centuries ;  and  they  appealed  to  their 

*  Compare  Du  Pin,  Perrin,  Wall,  Waddington,  &c. 
f  Meaning  Baptists. 


388  EXAMINATION  OF  THE  ORIGIN  AND 

old  books,  to  make  good  their  assertions.  There  were, 
indeed,  various  mystical  sects,  tinctured  more  or  less 
with  Manichgeism,  in  the  twelfth  and  following  cen- 
turies, who  rejected  all  water  baptism  on  much  the  same 
grounds  as  the  Quakers  still  do,  and  some  of  them 
assailed  infant  baptism  especially,  as  being  peculiarly 
unsuitable  and  absurd." 

Were  we  to  enter  into  a  full  examination  of  this  sub- 
ject, it  would  swell  this  chapter  beyond  its  prescribed 
limits,  and  be  a  matter  of  small  moment  to  our  present 
inquiry  when  ended — because  too  far  removed  from  the 
days  of  the  Apostles  to  affect  the  main  point  at  issue. 

Pierre  de  Bruys,  in  the  beginning  of  the  twelfth  cen- 
tury, as  has  already  been  remarked,  is  the  first  public 
teacher  on  record,  who  preached  against  infant  baptism, 
and  whose  followers  entirely  rejected  it  whilst  they 
retained  adult  baptism.  He  was  a  native  of  Langue- 
doc,  and  of  the  town  of  Albi.  And,  of  course,  belonged 
to  one  of  the  sects  of  Albigenses.  He  has,  by  some 
writers,  been  classed  under  the  more  general  name  of 
Waldenses.  He  differed,  however,  from  the  Waldenses 
proper,  on  infant  baptism  and  several  other  points. 
Some  short  time  after  his  death  we  read  of  several 
sects  who  rejected  it,  but  all  of  them  appear  to  be 
branches  of  the  same,  although  called  by  other  names, 
and  generally  after  the  places  in  which  they  flourish,  or 
after  their  leaders.  For  instance,  the  Henricians  were 
called  after  the  name  of  Henry,  who  was  a  disciple  of 
De  Bruys,  and  an  Italian  by  birth.  He  was  zealous 
and  active,  and  spread  his  doctrines  through  various 
parts  of  France.      His   followers  were   called  in  some. 


HISTORY  OF  THE  BAPTIST  CHURCH.  389 

places  Henricians,' and  in  others  after  the  names  of  the 
places  in  which  they  were  known.  Arnold,  of  Brescia, 
returned  to  Italy  ahout  the  year  1135  from  Paris, 
assumed  the  Monastic  garb,  and  began  to  preach  the 
same  doctrines  advocated  by  the  Henricians  in  France. 
His  followers  were  called  Arnoldists. 

A  display  is  sometimes  made  of  all  these  names ;  and 
readers  who  are  not  aware  of  their  origin,  are  induced 
to  think  they  wxigh  something  against  infant  baptism.* 

Decretal  Epistles  and  Councils  are  also  referred  to. 
But  we  need  only  examine  the  dates  and  circumstances 
with  which  they  stand  connected,  to  see  how  little  bear- 
ing all  of  them  have  on  the  subject. 

The  Lateran  Council,  under  Pope  Innocent  the  Second, 
which  condemned  Pierre  de  Bruys  and  Arnold,  was  held 
Anno  Domini,  1139,  some  thirty  years  after  the  rise  of 
the  Petrobrussians. 

The  Lateran  Council,  under  Pope  Innocent  the  Third, 
was,  in  1215,  some  sixty-four  years  later  than  the 
former,  and  only  shows  that  the  doctrine  of  Peter  was 
still  spreading. 

In  the  Decretal  Epistle  of  Innocent  the  Second,  is 
found  a  letter,  in  answer  to  one  from  the  Bishop  of 
Aries,  in  Provence,  the  country  of  Bruys,  written  about 
the  beginning  of  the  twelfth  century,  which  shows  that 
country  gave  birth  to  the  first  Antipedobaptists,  and 
that  they  first  agitated,  for  a  short  time  in  a  more  pri- 
vate way,  what  De  Bruys  soon  after  proclaimed  publicly. 

A  Synod  held  at  Arras,  in  the  year  1025,  which  has 
been  already  referred  to,  has  often  been  adduced  in  this 

■^'  Jones'  H.  C.     Encyclopedia  of  Religious  Knowledge. 

83* 


390  EXAMINATION  OF  THE  ORIGIN  AND 

controversy.  This  was  first  brought  forward  by  Stennet, 
from  Dr.  Allix's  work.  Stennet  only  gave  a  part  of  the 
facts  there  recorded.  We  there  find  that  Gundulphus 
and  his  followers  denied  that  baptism  could  do  good  to 
ANY  ONE — that  their  doctrines  were  very  similar  to  the 
Quakers  of  the  present  day.* 

The  Cathari  of  Germany,  Paterines  in  Italy,  and  the 
Paulicians  of  Greece,  are  next  appealed  to  as  the  line  of 
descent  in  which  Antipedobaptism  can  be  traced.  These 
were  all  branches  of  the  same  under  different  names  in 
different  countries,  and  were  semi-manicheans,  and  ob- 
jected to  all  baptism,  likewise  to  the  sacrament  of  the 
Lord's  Supper  If 

The  Paulicians,  in  Greece,  from  w^hom  all  the  others 
sprang,  took  their  name  from  one  Paulus,  who  com- 
menced his  career  in  Armenia,  about  the  beginning  of 
the  seventh  century.  He  rejected  both  of  the  sacra- 
ments, baptism  and  the  Lord's  Supper,  denied  the 
authority  of  the  Old  Testament — interpreted  the  New 
allegorically,  and  taught  that  the  Supreme  Being 
created  neither  the  world  nor  the  human  body:  and 
that  this  was  the  work  of  some  inferior  being.  They 
were  branded  as  heretics  and  persecuted  by  the  Greek 
Church,  but  persisted  in  their  doctrines.  When  ban- 
ished from  their  own  country  they  sought  refuge  in 
others,  continuing  to  inculcate  their  principles  where- 
ever  they  went. J  "  Li  different  countries,"  says  Mos- 
heim,  (in  which  he  is  followed  by  Baptist  writers,)  "they 

*  Wall.  f  Waddington  and  Mosheim. 

X  See  Fessenden's  Encyclopedia  of  Religious  Knowledge,  Mosheim, 
Waddington,  and  others. 


HISTOKY  OF  THE  BAPTIST  CHURCH.  391 

were  known  by  different  names.     In  Greece,  they  were 
called    Paulicians— in    Italy,    Paterines— in    Germany, 
Cathari,    or    rather    Gazari  — in    France,    Bulgarians, 
because  they  came  from  Bulgaria,  the  country  in  which 
the  head  of  the  sect  had  resided— also,  Publicians,  pro- 
bably  a   corrupt   pronunciation    of    Paulicians.      They 
were  also  called  'good  men,'  with  several  other  titles."* 
Whether  these  were  all  different  names  given  to  the 
same  sect,  at  different  times  and  in  different  countries, 
or  not — certain  it  is,  they  differed  very  little  from  each 
other  in  their  doctrines.     And  there  can  be  but  little 
doubt  in  regard  to  the  fact,  that  the  influence  of  these 
doctrines  on  the  minds  of  the  people  of  Albi  among 
whom  they  lived,  gave  rise  to  that  particular  sect  of  the 
Albigenses  who  objected  peculiarly  to  infant  baptism. 
The  Catholics  on  the  one  hand,  baptized  both  infants 
and  adults— the  Paulicians,  on  the   other,  rejected  all 
baptism  and  the  sacrament  of  the  supper.     The  inhabi- 
tants of  Albi  being  pleased  with  many  of  their  doc- 
trines, were   not   prepared   to   leap    across   the  whole 
ground  from  the   Catholics   to   the  Paulicians,  and   so 
took  a  middle  position  between  them,  blending  together 
what  they  most  highly  approved  of  each,  and  rejecting 
the  remainder.     They  were  disgusted  with  the  lives  of 
the  Roman  Catholic  priests  and  overburdened  with  use- 
less  ceremonies,  but  were  not  willing  to  give  up  the 
sacrament  of  the  supper — and  hence  retained  baptism  so 
far  as  it  could  be  made  a  preparatory  step  to  the  sup- 
per, but  rejected  the  baptism  of  infants. 

Or  it  may  be  that  the  Paulicians,  coming  among  a 
*  See  also  Waddington. 


392  EXAiMINATION  OF  THE  ORIGIN  AND 

people  where  the  Gnostic  philosophy  of  the  East  was 
little  known,  and  gradually  losing  its  influence  over 
their  own  minds,  they  began  to  decline  from  the  doc- 
trines of  their  forefathers,  and  adopt  in  part  the 
doctrines  of  the  Christians  around  them.  Their  first 
step  was  probably  to  administer  the  sacrament  of  the 
supper,  which  required  baptism,  as  a  preparatory  rite  to 
its  observance — but  they  refused  it  to  infants,  because, 
among  other  reasons,  they  said,  "  since  they  cannot 
believe  they  cannot  be  saved,  and  it  is  therefore  useless 
to  them."  This  was,  at  least,  the  chief  reason  given 
for  refusing  it  to  them  after  De  Bruys  began  to  preach 
in  public  what  they  had  canvassed  among  themselves 
more  privately. 

The  probabilities  in  favor  of  this  conjecture  are  in- 
creased by  the  fact,  that  Alanus,  a  writer  towards  the 
close  of  that  century,  1192,  reckoning  up  the  opinions 
of  the  Paulicians,  or  Cathari,  as  they  were  then  called, 
says,  they  ''  differ  among  themselves  as  to  baptism — 
some  rejecting  all  water  baptism,  others  refusing  it  only 
to  infants."  This  was  in  the  same  century  in  which 
De  Bruys  lived,  but  sometime  after  his  death.  Before 
this  century,  all  writers,  who  give  their  doctrines  on 
this  point,  unite  in  testifying  that  they  rejected  water 
baptism  and  the  Lord's  Supper  altogether. 

This,  after  much  labor  in  examining  and  comparing 
the  accounts  given  by  various  authors,  is,  according  to 
our  most  careful  and  deliberate  judgment,  the  most 
probable  of  all  the  conjectures  that  we  have  yet  seen 
in  regard  to  the  origin  of  Antipedobaptism.  If  it  ori- 
ginated before  this  time,  evidence  of  the   fact  has  not 


HISTORY  OF  THE  BAPTIST  CHURCH.  393 

been  brought  forward  by  any  writer  yet  known  to  us 
on  the  subject.  And  why  certain  Baptist  writers 
should  profess  to  trace  their  Church  through  these  sects, 
we  are  at  a  loss  to  conjecture,  unless  it  be,  because 
they  objected  to  the  cross,  the  worship  of  the  Virgin 
Mary,  and  some  other  popish  rites.  For  certainly  there 
is  nothing  in  their  history  to  show  they  held  the  pecu- 
liar doctrine  of  Antipedobaptism,  before  the  twelfth 
century.  And  had  they  opposed  it  even  from  their 
orioiin,  as  a  sect  that  was  of  too  late  a  date  to  avail 
anything  on  the  question  before  us. 

The  next  step  is  to  the  Donatists.  Through  these, 
it  has  been  pretended  by  some,  the  principles  of  Anti- 
pedobaptism can  be  traced.  This  sect  arose  in  the  year 
311  A.  D.  The  Bishop  of  Carthage,  Mensurius,  died 
that  year,  and  Cecilianus  was  elected  and  consecrated 
in  his  place.  The  Numidian  bishops,  who  belonged  to 
a  subordinate  province,  were  not  present,  and  objected 
both  to  the  person  elected  and  to  the  manner  of  proce- 
dure ;  and  determined  to  consecrate  Majorinus  in  oppo- 
sition to  him,  declaring  Cecilianus  was  not  properly 
put  into  office — alleging  against  him  and  also  against 
one  of  his  consecrators,  viciousness  of  life.  Two  parties 
were  now  formed,  and  several  successive  councils  assem- 
bled to  decide  the  controversy.  The  Numidian  party 
lost  their  cause  in  every  Council.  A  schism  was  finally 
produced,  and  a  schismatic  body  formed,  called  Dona- 
tists, after  the  name  of  Donatus,  their  principal  leader 
in  the  controversy.* 

Between  the   Donatists   and  Church   Catholic,  from 

'^  Mosheim,  AYaddington,  and  Church  historians  generally. 


394  EXAMINATION  OF  THE  ORIGIN  AND 

which  they  separated,  there  was  no  difference  as  to 
Church  organization,  except  that  the  Donatists  after- 
wards re-baptized  such  as  happened  to  come  over  to 
them  from  the  Church,  alleging  as  their  reason  for  this, 
that  baptism  was  not  valid  in  a  Church  in  which  such 
officers  as  Cecilianus  and  some  others  of  his  party  were 
permitted  to  administer  it.  As  to  Infant  Baptism,  they 
continued  to  practice  it,  as  they  had  done  before  their 
separation.  This  has  been  before  shown  from  the  acts 
of  Councils  passed,  when  the  Donatists  began  to  come 
back  into  the  great  body  of  the  Church  from  which 
they  had  separated.  In  two  Councils  in  the  Church  of 
Africa,  as  cited  in  the  first  part  of  this  work,  resolutions 
were  passed  concerning  those  baptized  in  infancy  among 
the  Donatists,  in  connection  with  holding  Church  offices. 
In  the  first,  it  was  resolved,  that  it  should  be  made  a 
question  of  consultation  with  neighboring  bishops,  whe- 
ther those  baptized  in  infancy  might  not  be  promoted, 
because  they  were  too  young  to  know  the  error  that  was 
committed,  and,  therefore,  less  guilty  than  those  capa- 
ble of  judging  for  themselves.* 

In  the  next,  it  was  resolved,  that  such  as  turned  to 
the  Church  as  soon  as  capable  of  understanding  the 
error,  might  hold  office  in  it ;  but  those  who  continued 
with  the  Donatists,  and  became  teachers,  before  correct- 
ing what  had  been  done,  must  be  deferred  for  longer 
consideration. t 

Again  :  Optatus,  bishop  of  Milevium,  in  persuading 
the  Donatists  to  union  with   the    Church,  tells    them, 

■*  Concil.  Carthag.  can.  48. 

f  Codex  Canonum  Eccl.  Africanas,  can.  48. 


HISTORY  OF  THE  BAPTIST  CHURCH.  395 

^'tlie  ecclesiastical  organization  is  one  and  the  same 
with  us  and  you.  Though  men's  minds  are  at  variance, 
the  sacraments  are  at  none.  And  we  may  say  we  be- 
lieve alike,  and  are  sealed  with  one  and  the  same  seal : 
not  otherwise  baptized  than  you,  nor  otherwise  ordained 
than  you."* 

Cresconius,  who  was  himself  a  Donatist,  anxious  to 
unite  the  two  parties,  uses  also  these  words:  "There  is 
between  us  and  you  one  religion,  the  same  sacraments, 
nothing  in  Christian  ceremonies  different.  It  is  a  schism 
that  is  between  us — not  a  heresy,  "f 

Now,  as  no  one  can  doubt  whether  the  Church  bap- 
tized infants  at  this  time,  what  plainer  testimony  need 
we  that  the  Donatists  practiced  the  same  ?  There  w^as 
"no  difference  in  the  sacraments"  and  "Christian  cere- 
monies," say  both  parties ;  and  Councils  passed  laws 
for  such  as  were  baptized  in  infancy  by  Donatists. 
What  need  we  more  to  prove  that  the  Donatists  bap- 
tized infants  ?  Surely  this  is  enough  to  convince  any 
reasonable  man.  Nor  does  any  writer,  in  plain  terms, 
deny  this  fact.  Yet  some  will  insinuate  and  imply  as 
much,  even  passing  on  to  the  Novatians,  professing  to 
see  signs  of  Antipedobaptism  in  that  sect  also  !  We 
must,  therefore,  inquire  who  the  Novatians  were,  and 
what  they  taught. 

The  Novatiansf  were  a  sect  called  after  Novatian,  a 

*  Lib.  3  de  Scliis.  Donatist. 

f  Apud  Augustinum  lib.  2,  contra  Cresconium.  See  Wall,  vol.  i.  p. 
105. 

J  See  Mosbeim,  Lurdner,  Milner,  Waddington,  and  bistorians  gene- 
rally. 


396  EXAMINATION  OF  THE  ORIGIN  AND 

Presbyter  in  the  Church  of  Rome,  who  was  a  man,  says 
Mosheim,  "of  uncommon  learning  and  eloquence,  but  of 
an  austere  and  rigid  character,  entertaining  the  most 
unfavorable  sentiments  of  those  who  had  been  separated 
from  the  communion  of  the  Church.  He  indulged  his 
severity  so  far  as  to  deny  that  any  who  had  fallen  into 
the  commission  of  grievous  transgressions,  especially 
those  who  had  apostatized  from  the  faith  under  the  perse- 
cution set  on  foot  by  Decius,  should  ever  be  again  received 
into  the  bosom  of  the  Church.  The  greater  part  of  his 
brother  Presbyters  were  of  a  different  opinion  in  this 
matter,  especially  Cornelius,  whose  credit  and  influence 
were  raised  to  the  highest  pitch  by  the  esteem  and  admi- 
ration which  his  eminent  virtues  so  naturally  excited. 
Hence  it  happened  that  when  a  bishop  was  to  be  chosen, 
in  250  A.  D.,  to  succeed  Fabius  in  the  see  of  Rome, 
Novatian  opposed  the  election  of  Cornelius  with  the 
greatest  activity  and  bitterness.  His  opposition,  how- 
ever, was  in  vain,  for  Cornelius  was  chosen  to  the  office, 
of  which  his  distinguished  merit  rendered  him  so  highly 
worthy.  Novation,  from  this  time,  separated  himself 
from  the  jurisdiction  of  Cornelius,  who,  in  his  turn, 
called  a  Council  at  Rome,  in  the  year  251,  and  cut  him 
oft"  and  his  partisans  from  the  communion  of  the  Church. 
This  turbulent  man  erected  a  new  society,  of  which  he 
was  the  first  bishop."* 

From,  this  extract,  we  see  that  Novatian  and  Corne- 
lius entertained  the  same  doctrinal  views,  belonged  to 
the  same  Church,  but  differed  in  regard  to  the  disposi- 
tion of  those  who  had  fallen  away  from  fear  of  persccu- 

*  iMoshciin. 


HISTORY  OF  THE  BAPTIST  CHURCH.  397 

tion.  But  this  is  not  all.  Novatian  was  an  aspirant 
for  the  office  of  bishop  in  the  same  Church,  and  a  rival 
of  Cornelius.  And  the  success  of  Cornelius  was,  no 
doubt,  the  chief  cause  of  his  forming  a  new  society,  over 
which  he  could  be  bishop,  whilst  laxity  of  discipline 
was  made  the  ostensible  reason.'*' 

As  they  were  ministers  in  the  same  Church,  and 
rivals  for  the  same  office,  they  must  have  entertained 
the  same  general  views  in  doctrine.  And  when  Nova- 
tian  separated,  the  only  reason  pretended  for  it  was 
laxity  of  discipline.     Nothing  was  said  about  baptism. 

On  the  other  hand,  Cornelius  charged  him  with  want 
of  moral  courage  and  unfitness  for  the'  office  of  bishop, 
because  he  had  been  baptized  under  the  influence  of 
fear  on  his  sick  bed,  instead  of  receiving  it  of  his  own 
free  will,  uninfluenced  by  external  causes. 

On  what  ground,  then,  can  he  be  claimed  as  the 
advocate  of  Baptist  principles  ?  A  man  baptized  by 
aspersion  himself,  and  the  baptizer  of  infants  1  And 
are  we  anywhere  informed  that  Novatian  or  any  of  his 
followers  ever  afterwards  changed  on  these  points  ?  No. 
Neither  Augustine,  nor  any  others  who  give  an  account 
of  the  various  sects  of  that  age  and  their  doctrines,  say 
anything  of  their  peculiar  notions  as  to  mode,  or  refu- 
sing baptism  to  infants.  Cyprian,  who  lived  and  wrote 
at  the  time  this  schism  was  made,  and  Eusebius  and 
Optatus,  whilst  the  Novatians  flourished,  say  nothino-  in 
their  accounts  of  the  diff'erences  between  the  Church 
and  the  sects  to  that  effect.  Mosheim,  on  the  con- 
trary, expressly  states  that  "there  was  no  difference  in 

*  Milaer,  Waddino^ton,  and  Lardner. 

34 


398  EXAMINATION  OF  THE  ORIGIN  AND 

point  of  doctrine  between  the  Novatians  and  the  great 
body  of  Christians.  What  peculiarly  distinguished  them 
was  their  refusing  to  re-admit  to  the  communion  of  the 
Church  those  who,  after  baptism,  had  fallen  into  the 
commission  of  sins,  though  they  did  not  pretend  that 
such  were  excluded  from  all  possibility  of  salvation."* 

What  then,  it  may  be  asked,  ever  suggested  the 
thought  that  the  Novatians  rejected  infant  baptism  ? 
Nothing,  so  far  as  we  can  learn,  except  it  be  the  mis- 
apprehension of  a  single  ivord.  The  Novatians,  like 
the  Donatists,  required  those  who  had  been  baptized  in 
the  Church  Catholic  to  be  re-baptized  when  they  united 
with  them,  on  the  ground  that  a  Church  so  lax  in  its 
government  vitiated  and  rendered  null  the  holy  rite  of 
baptism ;  and,  for  re-baptizing  in  such  cases,  they  were 
sometimes  called  Anabaptists,  which  simply  means,  to 
baptize  anew.f  Certain  Dutch  writers  of  later  years, 
finding  this  term  applied  to  the  Novatians,  inferred 
from  it  that  they  rejected  infant  baptism ;  and  others 
have  handed  down  what  i\\ey  suijposed.X  "TheNova- 
tians  assumed  to  themselves,"  says  Mosheim,  "the  title 
Cathari — i.  e.  yure  ;  and  what  shows  a  still  more  ex- 
travagant degree  of  vanity  and  arrogance,  they  obliged 
such  as  came  over  to  them  from  the  great  body  of  Chris- 
tians to  be  baptized  a  second  time  as  a  necessary  prepa- 
ration for  entering  into  their  society,"  &c.§  ♦ 

It  was  some  half  century  before  this  schism,  that  Origen 
declared,  "  Infant  baptism  was  the  usage  of  the  Church 

*  Vol.  i.  p.  96. 

\  Am  "  anew,"  Bartr't^w  ^'  to  baptize." 
X  See  Wall,  vol  ii.  ^  Vol.  i.  p.  \)<o. 


HISTORY  OF  THE  BAPTIST  CHURCH.  399 

handed  down  from  the  Apostles."  It  was  hefore  this  and 
before  the  name  of  "  Cathari"  was  beard  of,  that  a  Coun- 
cil at  Carthage  bad  legislated  against  the  delay  of 
baptism  till  the  eighth  day  after  birth,  as  a  rule. 
Hence,  had  the  Novatians  rejected  infant  baptism,  it 
would  have  been  an  innovation  on  the  established  order 
of  the  Universal  Church.  This,  however,  they  did  not 
do,  nor  did  any  other  sect  branching  from  or  uniting 
with  them  in  that  century.  For.  in  addition  to  the 
united  testimony  of  historians,  that  "there  was  no  dif- 
ference in  point  of  doctrine  between  them,"  we  have 
also  the  testimony  of  four  different  writers,  two  of 
whom — Epiphanius  and  Philastrius — lived  and  wrote 
shortly  after  this  schism  occurred,  who  give  a  history  of 
the  schismatical  bodies  and  new  sects,  and  describe 
their  peculiar  views  and  tenets,  and,  especially, 
where  they  conflict  with  the  teaching  of  the  great  body 
of  Christians,  but  say  nothing  of  the  rejection  of  infant 
baptism  as  the  peculiarity  of  one  of  them — which  is 
conclusive  testimony  that  no  such  difference  existed. 

As  to  modes,  we  have  already  noticed  the  fact,  in 
the  former  part  of  this  work,  that  some  baptized  by 
pouring  water,  mixed  with  oil,  on  the  head — some  with 
balsam — some  in  the  water,  and  some  not  at  all.  We 
will  not  waste  time  on  this  point,  but  confine  our  atten- 
tion to  the  practice  of  infant  baptism,  as  that  involves 
the  chief  and  grand  principle  that  separates  Baptists 
from  other  Christians. 

Much  time  and  labor  has  been  consumed  in  searching 
for  evidence  to  disprove  the  universality  of  infant  bap- 
tism in  the  Church,  during  the  four  first  centuries  of 


400  EXAMINATION  OF  THE  OKIGIN  AND 

the  Christian  era,  and  every  shadow  of  proof  that  could 
be  found  has  been  brought  forth.  A  Council  of  Car- 
thage, in  418,  A.  D.,  and  another  also  in  416,  A.  D., 
legislating  against  the  Pelagian  heresy,  have  been  both 
referred  to  as  evidence  that  infant  baptism  was  not 
thoroughly  established  in  the  Church  till  about  that 
time.  But  the  true  state  of  the  case  is,  (as  has  already 
been  shown,)  that  the  object  of  the  canons  pointed  to 
in  these  Councils,  was  to  confine  the  Pelagians  within 
limits  that  would  not  permit  them  to  escape  the  doctrine 
of  original  sin.* 

St.  Basil's  exhortation  to  his  catechumens  has  like- 
wise been  urged  as  proof  to  the  same  effect,  which  has 
also  been  shown  to  have  no  bearing  on  the  question. f 
We  might  adduce  various  others,  but  they  are  all  of  a 
similar  character  to  those  just  mentioned,  not  one  of 
them  affecting  positively  infant  baptism.  Much  stress 
has  been  lain  on  an  extract  from  "Justin  Martyr's 
Apology,"  where  he  gives  an  account  of  the  manner  in 
which  Christians  received  members  into  the  Church,  a 
part  of  which  has  been  cited.  In  writing  to  the  Em- 
peror and  Senate,  in  defence  of  Christians  who  had  been 
slandered  by  their  enemies,  because  he  speaks  of  adults 
only,  against  whom  the  charges  were  made,  and  who 
of  course  constituted  at  that  time  the  chief  portion,  and 
at  all  times  the  responsible  part  of  the  Church,  it  has 
been  inferred  there  were  no  children  baptized.  He 
gays — ''  They  who  are  persuaded  and  do  believe  that 

*  See  Testimony  for  Infant  Baptism  iu  the  first  three  chapters  of 
this  book, 
t  Ibid. 


HISTORY  OF  THE  BAPTIST  CHURCH.  401 

those  things  which  are  taught  by  us  are  true,  and  do 
promise  to  live  according  to  them,  are  directed  first  to 
pray  and  ask  God  with  fasting,  the  forgiveness  of  their 
former  sins:  and  we  also  pray  and  fast  together  with 
them.  Then  we  bring  them  to  some  place  where  there 
is  water,  and  they  are  regenerated  by  the  same  way  of 
regeneration  by  which  we  were  regenerated,"  &c.  &c. 

Because  nothing  is  here  said  of  infant  children,  and 
because  they  could  not  pray  and  fast  as  adults  were 
required  to  do,  it  has  been  argued  that  they  were  not 
then  received  into  the  Church !  But  why  should  Justin 
refer  to  the  case  of  children?  He  was  not  drawing  up 
a  regular  Formulary  of  the  Christian  Church,  but  only 
referring  to  its  doctrine  and  practice,  in  such  a  way  as 
to  convince  the  emperor  and  others  that  there  Avas 
nothing  taught  or  practiced  among  them  that  led  to  the 
enormities  of  which  they  had  been  accused.  He  had 
already,  in  this  same  Epistle,  appealed  to  the  lives  of 
many  then  living,  who  had  been  made  disciples  from 
childhood  as  examples  of  the  good  influence  of  their 
doctrines;  and  he  now  shows  that  there  is  nothing  in 
their  practice,  or  required  of  persons  to  become  mem- 
bers, contrary  to  the  same.  There  was  no  necessity  for 
him  to  speak  of  children  here — this  he  had  done  in 
another  place,  and  his  object  now  did  not  require  it. 
Charges  had  been  made  against  those  able  to  perpetrate 
crimes,  not  against  the  children.  And  he  designed  to 
show  that  nothing  was  required  of  persons  when  initiated 
or  afterwards,  but  that  which  must  be  approved  by  the 
emperor  and  senate.  What  would  the  reader  think,  were 
no  stronger  testimony  to  be  produced  on  the  other  side  ? 

3i* 


402  EXAMINATION  OF  THE  ORIGIN  AND 

The  writings  of  the  early  Christians  have  also  been 
ransacked  to  find  testimony  of  another  kind,  to  disprove 
the  infant's  claim  to  Church-membership.  Much  labor 
has  been  spent  to  find  cases  of  the  children  of  Chris- 
tians  who  were  baptized  at  adult  age,  in  order  to  prove 
that  it  was  not  the  universal  custom  of  Christian  parents 
to  have  their  children  baptized  in  infancy.  But  could 
any  such  cases  be  found,  they  would  only  show,  that 
some  Christians  in  that  tige  may  have  neglected  this 
duty,  although  they  acknowledged  its  authority  as  many 
do  in  this  age.  It  seems,  however,  that  there  was  great 
unanimity  of  action  among  ancient  Christians  on  this 
point;  for  out  of  fourteen  cases,  produced  .from  first  to 
Inst,  it  has  been  found  on  strict  examination,  that  all 
of  them  were  either  baptized  in  infancy,  or  were  born 
before  their  parents  became  Christians,  with  the 
exception  of  one  single  case,  in  the  fourth  century. 
This  is  Gregory  Nazianzen,  concerning  whom  it  is 
doubtful  whether  his  father  was  a  Christian  or  not, 
when  he  was  born. 

Despairing  of  establishing  the  invalidity  of  infant 
baptism  from  the  writings  and  practices  of  Christians  in 
those  countries  in  which  Christianity  was  first  planted, 
a  dernier  resort  was,  for  a  time,  made  by  a  party  to 
Great  Britain.  But  from  this  covert  they  were  soon 
driven,  and  had  entirely  abandoned  it,  as  many  sup- 
posed, until  during  the  summer  of  1843,  an  editor  of  a 
public  journal  having  made  a  flourish  of  modern  names, 
favorable  to  Antipedobaptism,  was  called  upon  to  give 
some  ancient  authorities,  or  to  produce  a  single  pas- 
sage from  any  writer  during  the  first  thousand  years  of 


HISTORY  OF  THE  BAPTIST  CHURCH.  403 

Christianity,  that  would  show  infant  baptism  was  not 
the  practice 'of  the  Church  during  that  time.  He,  in 
reply,  cited  the  testimony  of  Bede,  as  he  supposed,  but 
unfortunately  for  his  cause  he  quoted  from  Fabian,  who 
wrote  in  the  time  of  Henry  VII.,  in  the  early  part  of 
the  sixteenth  century. 

The  ''venerable  Bede,"  as  he  is  generally  called, 
wrote  a  Church  history  of  the  English  nation  in  the 
early  part  of  the  eighth  century,  in  which  he  records 
the  efforts  of  Augustine,  the  Monk,  in  the  sixth  century, 
to  plant  the  Romish  Church  among  the  English  people. 
Augustine  found  Christianity  already  among  the  ancient 
Britons,  and  attempted  to  unite  them  with  his  own  fol- 
lowers, but  proposed  that  they  should  adopt  his  rites 
and  ceremonies,  in  such  things  as  he  differed  from  them. 
This  they  refused.  After  making  various  modifications 
of  his  terms  of  union,  he  made  his  final  proposal:*  "You 
practice  in  many  things  contrary  to  our  customs;  and, 
indeed,  contrary  to  the  universal  custom  of  the  Church. 
And  yet,  if  you  will  comply  with  me  in  these  things — 
that  you  keep  Easter  at  the  right  time — that  you  per- 
form the  ofiice  of  baptizing  (by  which  we  are  regenerated 
unto  God)  according  to  the  custom  of  the  Holy  Roman 
Church  and  the  Apostolic  Church.  And  you,  with  us, 
do  preach  the  word  of  the  Lord  to  the  nation  of  the 
English.  We  will  bear  patiently  with  all  other  things 
which  you  practice  contrary  to  our  custom." 

But  they  answered,  "they  would  do  none  of  these 
things,  nor  own  him  for  their  archbishop." 

This  passage,  says  Wall,  is  given  by  several  English  his- 
*  Bede  Eccle.  Hist.  lib.  2,  c.  2.  cited  by  Wall. 


404  EXAMINATION  OF  THE  ORIGIN  AND 

torians,  and  all  to  the  same  effect.  Among  others,  bj  one 
Fabian  in  the  time  of  Henry  VII.,  who  wrote  a  chroni- 
cle of  the  English  history  in  English.  Two  editions 
were  in  the  Oxford  Library  at  the  time  Wall  wrote,  one 
of  which  had  the  title-page  torn  out.  In  one  of  them, 
the  passage  to  which  the  appeal  is  made  against  infant 
baptism,  was  translated  into  the  same  sense  of  the 
original  of  Bede.  The  other  had  a  few  words  left  out, 
(as  he  supposes,  by  mistake.)  But  on  this  copy,  which 
diifers  both  from  Bede  and  from  the  other  edition,  rests 
the  whole  argument  to  prove  the  English  Church  did 
not  originally  practice  infant  baptism !  Although  a 
writer  of  the  sixteenth  century  is  too  late  to  place  con- 
fidence in,  under  any  circumstances,  unless  he  gives  the 
original  of  book  and  chapter  from  which  he  copies — yet 
this  defective  translation  has  been  made  the  basis  of  an 
argument  against  the  original  itself,  and  against  the 
translation  of  others  ! 

The  case  stands  as  follows :  One  edition  of  Fabian 
reads,  "  Then  he  (Austin)  sayd  to  them,  sin  ye  woll  not 
assent  to  my  hestes  generally,  assent  ye  to  me  espe- 
cially in  these  thyngs :  The  first  is  that  ye  kepe  Ester- 
day  in  due  forme  and  tyme,  as  it  is  ordeyned.  The 
second,  that  ye  give  christendome  to  the  children  in  the 
manner  that  is  used  in  the  Churche  of  Rome.  And  the 
third,  that  ye  preche  unto  the  Anglis  the  word  of  God."* 
In  the  other  edition,  the  words,  "in  the  manner  that  it 
is  used  in  the  Church  of  Rome,"  are  left  out;  and  the 
passage  simply  says,  "  that  ye  give  christendome  to  the 
children." 

*  See  Wall,  vol.  ii.  3d  edit.  p.  118. 


HISTORY  OF  THE  BAPTIST  CHURCH.  405 

Now,  who  would  ever  have  supposed  that  a  people 
who  professed  to  do  nothing  withcflit  a  "Thus  saith  the 
Lord,"  would  from  such  evidence  as  this  argue  that  the 
ancient  Church  of  Briton  was  opposed  to  infant  bap- 
tism ?  and  quote  it,  too,  as  Bede's  testimony,  when 
taken  from  another  writer,  and  from  an  edition  differing 
not  only  from  another  edition  of  the  same  writer,  but 
from  various  other  writers  who  refer  to  the  same  ori- 
ginal ?  We  all  know  how  liable  transcribers  are  to 
leave  out  words  or  parts  of  a  sentence :  an  hundred 
mistakes  occur  on  the  side  of  omission,  to  one  on  the 
side  of  adding  too  much. 

The  testimony  of  Bede,  instead  of  proving  anything 
against  infant  baptism  in  the  ancient  Church  of  Britain, 
is  positive  testimony  to  its  authority.  It  shows  that 
both  the  Church  of  Rome  and  of  Britain,  which  had 
been  separate  from  their  first  planting,  gave  baptism  to 
infants,  though  there  was  some  difi'erence  in  their  cere- 
monies attending  the  administering  of  the  rite.  Rome 
had  made  additions  to  it,  which  did  not  originally  ac- 
company the  rite  of  baptism,  and  against  which  the 
Britons  objected.  That  the  Britons  practiced  infant 
baptism  is  evident,  also,  from  the  testimony  of  Pela- 
gius,  who  was  born  and  bred  in  England,  and  came 
to  Rome  before  Augustine  visited  his  country ;  and 
who,  in  his  controversy  with  Augustine,  the  bishop  of 
Hippo,  declared  that  "  he  never  heard  of  even  any  here- 
tic that  denied  baptism  to  infants." 

So  that,  so  far  as  the  testimony  of  history  can  avail, 
it  establishes  the  fact  that  the  Church  in  ancient  Britain, 
as  well  as  in  Rome  and  in  Greece,  and  in  Alexandria, 


406  EXAMINATION  OF  THE  ORIGIN  AND 

Palestine,  and  Asia  Minor,  gave  baptism  to  infants  from 
the  beginning.     What  better  evidence  need  we? 

The  same  has  been  found  to  be  the  practice  of  the 
Christians  on  the  coast  of  Malabar,  who  had  been  sepa- 
rated from  other  Christians  more  than  thirteen  hundred 
years.  When  first  discovered,  after  this  long  period, 
and  brought  to  the  knowledge  of  other  portions  of  the 
Christian  world,  they  had  the  custom  of  infant  baptism, 
and  still  continue  it,  claiming  as  the  founder  of  their 
Church  and  doctrine  the  Apostle  St.  Thomas."* 

To  whatever  point  we  turn,  therefore,  we  find  evi- 
dence accumulating  on  evidence,  that  infant  baptism 
was  the  practice  of  the  Primitive  Church.  And  beyond 
doubt,  it  must  surprise  the  reader  as  it  has  the  writer, 
that  any  who  have  examined  the  evidence,  can  resist  it. 
But  it  is  stranger  still,  that  such  should  ransack  all 
history  to  find  testimony  on  the  other  side ;  and  then 
turn  round,  and  try  to  cast  discredit  upon  all  Church 
history ;  and  make  an  array  of  the  corruptions  in  the 
Church,  to  invalidate  the  authority  of  a  rite  known  to 
exist  before  such  corruptions  were  made  !  But  shall  we 
discard  a  doctrine  because  of  abuse  ?  Ought  we  not 
rather  to  discriminate  between  the  abuse  and  the  thing 
itself?  "Prove  all  things,  hold  fast  that  which  is 
good,"  is  the  Apostolic  injunction. 

Shall  we  discard  the  Lord's  Supper  because  some 
have  vainly  supposed  the  bread  and  wine  were  changed 
into  the  natural  body  and  blood  of  Christ  ?  The  fact 
that  infant  baptism  was  the  practice  of  every  Church, 
extending  over  thousands  of  miles,  from  the  first  that 
'■^'  Buchanan's  Researches. 


HISTORY  OE  THE  BAPTIST  CHURCH.  407 

is  known  particularly  on  that  point,  and  no  one  ever 
heard  to  call  its  lawfulness  in  question,  is  of  itself  suffi- 
cient to  dispel  the  mere  surmise  that  it  was  an  innova- 
tion. Again,  the  fact  that  there  was  much  conjecture 
and  discussion  among  early  Christian  writers,  as  to  its 
effects  and  the  reasons  why  it  was  commanded,  shows 
that  it  w^as  not  instituted  by  men.  For  had  it  been  of 
human  origin,  the  reason  and  grounds  of  necessity 
would  have  been  given  in  the  first  place.  But,  like 
adult  baptism,  being  ordered  by  Divine  wisdom,  men 
are  left  to  conjecture  as  to  its  grounds,  effects,  and 
other  particulars,  which  the  master  did  not  think  proper 
to  reveal. 

The  evidence  that  has  now  been  adduced,  be  it  ob- 
served, is  not  merely  the  opinions  or  conjectures  of  men, 
but  their  testimony  to  that  which  was  the  object  of  the 
senses,  and  is  intended  as  corroborative  evidence  of  the 
correctness  of  the  interpretation  we  give  of  the  Scrip- 
tures— as  the  tree,  showing  by  its  leaves  and  fruit,  what 
was  the  nature  of  the  young  scion  about  which  there 
has  been  so  much  difference  of  opinion. 

Ancient  records  and  passages  that  speak  of  infant 
baptism,  are  referred  to  just  as  we  refer  to  passages  of 
the  same  writings,  that  speak  of  the  different  books  of 
the  New  Testament,  when  our  object  is  to  prove  that 
any  one  of  those  books  w\as  received  among  the  early 
Christians  as  of  Divine  authority.  How  can  one,  there- 
fore, under  any  pretence  whatever,  gainsay  this  testi- 
mony, so  long  as  he  appeals  to  it  in  support  of  the 
genuineness  of  the  different  books  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment, and  to  Avhich  we  must  appeal,  or  open  the  way  to 
the  rejection  of  the  Holy  Scriptures  ? 


408  EXAMINATION  OF  THE  ORIGIN  AND 

By  such  appeal  and  tests,  we  can  find  no  Christian  body 
that  admitted  the  necessity  of  baptism  to  adults  and  re- 
fused it  to  infants,  until  the  beginning  of  the  twelfth  cen- 
tury, when,  in  the  midst  of  the  darkness  that  overspread 
Europe,  one  Peter  de  Bruys,  of  Languedoc,  and  some 
others  connected  with  him,  began  to  promulge  the  doc- 
trine, that  it  was  unnecessary  to  baptize  infants,  because 
they  could  not  believe,  and  therefore  could  not  be  saved. 
One,  writing  about  the  year  1126,  says:  "It  might 
have  seemed  there  was  no  need  to  confute  such  a  doctrine 
as  this,  were  it  not  that  it  had  now  continued  twenty 
years.    The  first  seeds  were  sown  by  Peter  de  Bruys."* 

This  sect  opposed  the  building  of  churches,  and  said 
that  singing  *' was  mocking  God,"  &c.  In  regard  to 
infant  baptism,  this  author  thus  writes : — 

"  Christ  sending  his  disciples  out  to  preach,  says  in 
the  gospel,  '  Go  ye  out  into  all  the  land  and  preach  the 
Gospel  to  every  creature — he  that  believeth  and  is  bap- 
tized shall  be  saved,  but  he  that  believeth  not  shall  be 
damned.'  From  these  words  of  our  Saviour  it  is  plain 
that  none  can  be  saved,  unless  he  believes  and  is  bap- 
tized: that  is,  have  both  Christian  faith  and  baptism. 
For  not  one  of  these,  but  both  together,  do  save  !  So  that 
infants,  though  they  be  by  you  baptized,  yet  since  by 
reason  of  their  age  they  cannot  believe,  are  not  saved.'' '\ 

This  is  the  first  public  and  open  avowal  against  infant 
baptism  as  a  Christian  rite,  on  record. J     The  followers 

*  Peter,  Abbot  of  Cluni.  See  Wall's  History,  vol.  ii.  p.  237.— Mos- 
heim  and  Waddington. 

f  Wall's  Hist.,  vol.  ii.  p.  235.     Also  Milner,  aud  others. 

J  If  any  writer  will  produce  an  undoubted  passage  to  that  effect  of  an 
earlier  date,  it  shall  be  inserted  in  the  next  edition  of  this  book,  and 
acknowledged  in  other  ways. 


HISTORY  OP  THE  BAPTIST  CHURCH.  409 

of  Gundulphus,  who  were  condemned  in  a  Synod,  at 
Arras,  in  the  preceding  century,  have  been  cited  as  the 
first.  But  they  held  all  baptism  to  be  of  no  use — that 
a  moral  life  was  suflQcient. 

"This,"  said  they,  "is  our  doctrine,  to  renounce  the 
world,  to  bridle  the  lusts  of  the  flesh,  to  maintain  our- 
selves by  the  labor  of  our  own  hands,  to  do  violence  to 
no  man,  to  love  the  brethren.  If  this  plan  of  righteous- 
ness be  observed,  there  is  no  need  of  baptism ;  if  it  be 
neglected,  baptism  is  of  no  avail."*  They  are  said  to 
have  regarded  the  Lord's  Supper  and  dignitaries  in  the 
Church,  in  the  same  light.  And  in  their  opposition  to 
baptism,  they  gave  as  a  particular  reason  for  the  case  of 
infants,  that  they  could  not  understand  and  confess  the 
truth.  They  may  be  regarded,  therefore,  as  esteeming 
infant  baptism  even  more  unreasonable  than  adult,  but 
both  alike  unnecessary.  In  this  sense,  it  may  be  said, 
the  first  opposers  of  infant  baptism  were  brought  to  light 
in  the  beginning  of  the  eleventh  century.  But  the  Petro- 
brussians,  in  the  following  century,  took  a  very  different 
ground,  and  opposed  infant  baptism,  whilst  they  received 
adult  baptism.  They  contended  infants  could  not  be 
saved,  though  they  were  baptized,  because  they  could 
not  believe.  And  they  certainly  interpreted  that  pas- 
sage of  scripture,  on  which  the  opponents  of  baptism 
lay  so  much  stress  in  this  age,  more  consistently  than  is 
now  done.  "  He  that  believeth  and  is  baptized  shall  be 
saved — he  that  believeth  not  shall  be  damned."  Mark 
xviw  16.  If,  according  to  this  passage,  faith  be  in  all 
cases  necessary  to  baptism,  consistency  in  all  its  parts 

*  Wall. 

35 


410  EXAMINATION  OF  THE  ORIGIN  AND 

requires  faith  as  necessary  in  all  cases  to  salvation.  So 
that  if  it  be  applicable  to  infants  in  the  one  case,  it  must 
be  in  both ;  therefore,  the  Petrobrussians  were  more  con- 
sistent than  the  Antipedobaptists  of  the  present  day,  on 
this  point. 

The  doctrine  of  Peter  de  Bruys  was  adopted  after- 
wards by  several  sects,  or  rather  advocated  by  those 
called  by  other  names,  but  they  were  few  in  number, 
and  but  little  known  till  after  the  dawn  of  the  Reforma- 
tion under  Luther ;  when  it  appears,  that  about  the  year 
1521,  they  collected  together  in  considerable  numbers, 
chiefly  from  Saxony  and  the  adjacent  countries,  headed 
by  one  Munzer,  Stubner  and  Stork,  and  are  described 
by  various  writers  as  very  fanatical,  turbulent  and  sedi- 
tious;— who,  says  Mosheim,  "declared  war  against  all 
laws,  government  and  magistrates  of  every  kind.  But 
this  seditious  crowd  was  routed  and  dispersed  without 
much  difficulty,  by  the  Elector  of  Saxony  and  other 
princes;  Munzer  was  put  to  death,  and  his  factious  fol- 
lowers scattered  abroad  in  different  places."  They  were 
afterwards  more  timid,  but  still  continued  to  spread  their 
principles,  and  were  called  Anabaptists.  About  the  year 
1533,  a  portion  of  them,  perhaps  more  fanatical  and 
seditious  than  others,  headed  by  John  Matthison,  John 
Bockhold,  a  tailor,  and  one  Gerard,  took  the  city  of 
Munster,  deposed  the  magistrates,  and  proclaimed  John 
Brockhold  king  and  legislator  of  their  new  hierarchy. 
Munster  was  retaken  the  next  year,  and  after  a  long 
siege,  their  New  Jerusalem,  as  they  called  it,  destroyed, 
and  its  mock  monarch  punished  with  a  most  painful 
death.* 

^  See  Mosheim,  and  historians  generally. 


HISTORY  OF  THE  BAPTIST  CHURCH.  411 

Their  doctrine  of  a  new  and  perfect  Church,  guided 
by  visions  and  revelations  from  Heaven,  which  set  aside 
the  necessity  for  civil  government;  and  the  abolishing 
of  ranks  and  titles,  and  the  equal  distribution  of  goods, 
making  a  common  stock  for  all  alike;  together  with 
polygamy  and  other  liberties,  brought  upon  them  the 
dislike  and  persecution  of  civil  rulers.  In  1536  Menno 
Simonis,  who  had  been  a  Roman  Catholic  priest,  was 
chosen  their  leader,  who  modified  many  of  their  tenets, 
rejected  polygamy,  visions,  and  other  more  objectionable 
features,  and  reduced  their  system  to  more  consistency 
and  order. 

Their  intolerance  when  in  possession  of  Munster,  and 
open  avowal  of  intention  to  bring  all  the  nations  of  the 
earth  under  their  dominion,  had  spread  far  and  wide, 
which  excited  unkindness  and  intolerance  toward  them 
in  return.  And  not  until  the  publication  of  their  faith 
in  1626,  in  a  form  still  more  improved,  did  they  obtain 
the  confidence  of  public  rulers,  and  the  liberty  to  incul- 
cate generally  their  doctrines  unmolested. 

The  first  English  Baptists  that  we  read  of  came  into 
England  from  Holland,  about  the  year  1610.  They 
were  among  the  Puritans  who  returned  after  the  death 
of  their  pastor,  Rev  John  Smith.* 

The  first  church  of  that  society  in  England  was 
organized  in  1638,  under  the  pastoral  care  of  the  Rev. 
Mr.  Jessee.f 

The  first  Baptist  Church  in  the  United  States  was 
formed  in  1639,  in  Providence,  Rhode  Island,  by  Roger 

*  Murdock's  note  on  Mosbeim,  vol.  iii. 
f  Buck's  T.  D.,  and  authorities. 


412  CONCLUDING  REMARKS. 

Williams;  who,  not  being  able  to  find  an  "ordained 
minister  in  America  that  had  been  immersed  on  a  pro- 
fession of  faith,"  first  immersed  Mr.  Ezekiel  Hopkins, 
who  afterwards  immersed  Mr.  Williams. { 

Mr.  Williams  afterwards  left  the  Baptists  and  turned 
Quaker;  but  ministers  of  the  Baptist  persuasion  emi- 
grated to  America  and  settled  in  difi*erent  States  after 
that,  so  that  all  their  churches  in  this  country  did  not 
spring  from  him. 

We  cannot  find  that  immersion  was  made  essential  to 
baptism  by  the  Anabaptists  before  the  sixteenth  cen- 
tury. iLsTor  that  infant  baptism  was  rejected  by  any 
sect,  branch  of  the  Christian  Church,  or  writer,  before 
the  twelfth.  (We  need  not  reiterate  what  has  been  so 
often  repeated  in  regard  to  Tertullian.)  After  its  rejec- 
tion by  the  Petrobrussians,  it  spread  among  some  of  the 
sects  that  were  in  existence  before  the  time  of  Pierre  de 
Bruys,  but  that  any  one  of  them  rejected  it  before,  we 
challenge  the  opposers  of  infant  baptism  to  prove,  and 
and  pledge  ourselves,  if  a  single  case  can  be  produced, 
to  acknowledge  it  as  publicly  as  we  here  declare  our  be- 
lief to  the  contrary. 

And  we  call  upon  those  who  are  accustomed  to  repeat 
the  broad  assertions  to  which  we  have  alluded,  to  ex- 
amine the  ground  on  which  they  stand.  The  unqualified, 
dogmatic  manner,  in  which  many  speak  of  the  mode  and 
subjects  of  baptism,  is  unwarranted  by  Christian  charity 
and  the  facts  in  the  case.  How  often  do  we  hear  infant 
baptism  denounced  as  unscriptural  and  a  great  evil,  with 
as  little  qualification  as  they  condemn  a  gross  sin ! 

X  Memoirs  of  Roger  Williams,  I.  D.  Kuowles.  Also  H.  Discourse, 
by  Hague,  1840. 


CONCLUDING  REMARKS.  413 

The  Western  Recorder,  a  Baptist  newspaper,  pub- 
lished in  Louisville,  Ky.,  says:  "Of  all  the  'damnable 
heresies'  in  that  black  catalogue  which  has  befouled 
Christianity,  we  consider  infant  baptism  the  most  dam- 
nable. If  other  heresies  have  damned  their  thousands, 
this  has  damned  its  tens  of  thousands." 

Such  language  in  a  Christian  paper,  chills  one's  blood 
to  its  fountain  head  !  And  if  uttered  by  an  Infidel 
writer  against  nine-tenths  of  the  Christian  Church,  on 
any  other  point  as  it  is  here  done,  would  place  him  un- 
der the  ban  of  the  Christian  world. 

A  certain  Dr.  Maclay,  a  Baptist  minister,  writing  to 
a  minister  of  another  denomination,  says:  "I  consider 
infant  baptism  the  greatest  curse  that  has  ever  afflicted 
Christendom.  It  has  done  more  to  corrupt  the  Church 
of  God,  and  make  it  a  den  of  robbers,  than  all  the  other 
inventions  of  the  wicked  one.  This  accursed  thing  has 
rendered  the  Churches  of  the  Reformation  nearly  as 
corrupt  as  the  Romish  Church  itself."* 

Now  we  cannot  believe  these  gentlemen  had  ever  ex- 
amined the  question  to  which  they  apply  such  language, 
beyond  a  narrow,  contracted,  and  unwarranted  inter- 
pretation of  the  Holy  Scriptures,  and  perhaps  a  treatise 
or  two  of  some  prejudiced  writer.  And  although  the 
whole  Baptist  communion  cannot  be  held  responsible 
for  the  language  and  sentiments  of  individuals,  they 
have,  in  a  corporate  capacity,  expressed  sentiments  but 
little  less  objectionable  to  their  Christian  brethren  of 
other  names. 

"  The  American  and  Foreign  Bible  Society,"  formed 
*  Cited  by  Thomas  0.  Summers  on  Baptism,  p.  175. 

35* 


414  CONCLUDING  REMARKS. 

for  the  express  object  of  translating  the  Holy  Scrip- 
tures into  Foreign  Languages,  and  ^vhich  we  believe  has 
the  approbation  and  support  of  their  whole  denomina- 
tion, (but  few  exceptions,  if  any,)  have  published  to  the 
world — "  Resolved. ...the  nations  of  the  earth  must  now 
look  to  the  Baptist  denomination  alone  for  faithful 
translations  of  the  word  of  God."*  And  in  their  An- 
nual Report,  they  charge  the  British  and  Foreign  Bible 
Society,  and  the  American  Bible  Society,  with  "virtu- 
ally combining  to  obscure  at  least  part  of  the  Divine 
revelation,  and  to  circulate  versions  of  the  Bible  unfaith- 
ful, at  least  so  far  as  the  subject  of  baptism  is  con- 
cerned."t 

Further,  out  of  this  has  arisen  a  less  responsible 
body,  which  have  not  the  approbation  of  all ;  but  of  a 
large  portion  of  the  Baptists,  who  are  now  engaged  in 
making  a  new  translation  of  our  English  Bible,  with  the 
special  object  in  view  to  change  baptism  and  baptize  into 
immersion  and  to  immerse.  This,  of  course,  is  designed 
to  rival  our  old  English  version,  and  the  hope  is  fondly 
cherished,  that  it  will  eventually  supplant  it !  But  who 
that  can  appreciate  the  question,  will  not  desire  to  see 
the  reasons  given  for  these  changes,  and  hence  every 
change  fairly  discussed ;  and,  therefore,  a  commentary 
on  the  Bible,  if  anything — not  a  translation  expressing 
their  mere  ipse  dixit ! 

We  can  foresee  nothing  but  evil  in  such  an  attempt ; 

it  will  open  a  way  for  every  branch  of  the   Christian 

body  to  make  a  translation  for   themselves,   and  thus 

destroy  the  unity  of  the  Bible,  and  undermine  the  public 

*  A.  F.  Bible  Society,  April  28,  1840.  f  Ibid. 


CONCLUDING  REMARKS.  415 

faith  in  the  Divine  authority  of  Christianity.  Such 
an  effort,  such  sentiments,  are  not  called  for;  while 
they  separate  Christians  farther  apart,  they  also  aid  in 
promoting  infidelity  among  men.  They  do  not  partake 
of  the  spirit  of  our  Holy  religion,  or  illustrate  its  doc- 
trines. They  assume  an  infallibility  of  judgment,  and 
want  of  Christian  charity  tow^ards  others,  not  warranted 
by  the  word  of  God.  This  the  world  can  see,  and  will 
not  fail  to  mark.  To  denounce  the  great  portion  of  the 
Christian  world  as  conspiring  together  to  ''  obscure  a 
part  of  the  Divine  revelation,"  is  a  serious  charge  ! 
And  to  pronounce  a  rite  that  had  been  the  doctrine 
and  practice  of  the  whole  Christian  Church  until  the 
twelfth  century,  and  which  has  been  continued  by  nine- 
tenths  of  the  Christian  world  ever  since,  as  the  "  most 
damnable  of  heresies,"  and  "greatest  curse  that  has 
ever  afflicted  the  Church  !"  if  not  blasphemy,  approaches 
so  near  to  it,  that  they  cannot  be  easily  distinguished 
from  each  other. 

Aside  from  the  spirit  and  language  to  which  we  here 
object,  there  is  a  self-sufficiency  and  arrogance  in  the 
manner  in  which  these  subjects  are  treated  in  the  pulpit 
and  in  private,  that  is  exceedingly  offensive  to  Chris- 
tian taste,  and  is  often  an  abuse  of  Christian  hospitality. 
By  our  firesides  and  in  our  families,  they  are  often 
introduced,  and  treated  in  a  manner  that  implies  all  are 
knaves  or  fools  that  do  not  agree  with  them  ! 

If  such  will  examine  the  whole  question,  as  they 
should  do,  we  believe  they  would  afterwards  teach  the 
opposite  doctrine,  or  at  least  learn  to  speak  of  such 
things  wdth  more    modesty.     It   cannot  be  that  these 


416  CONCLUDING  REMARKS. 

persons  realize  how  much  is  implied  in  the  doctrines 
which  they  teach.  They  assume  not  only  that  the 
Church,  against  which  Christ  promised  "  the  gates  of 
hell  should  not  prevail,"  became  corrupt  in  essentials,  in 
the  first  age  after  the  Apostles,  but  continued  so  until 
the  sixteenth  century,  thereby  destroying  its  "■  tens  of 
thousands,"  but  that  for  a  long  period  there  was  no 
Church,  because  all,  with  here  and  there  exceptions  in 
the  missionary  fields,  were  baptized  in  infancy,  which 
they  do  not  admit  is  baptism,  and  as  baptism  is  the  only 
initiatory  rite  by  which  they  could  become  members  of 
the  visible  Church,  therefore,  God  had  no  visible  Church 
at  the  time  of  the  Reformation.  And  none  who  were 
engaged  in  reforming  the  Church  were  members  of  the 
Church,  because  they  had  all  been  baptized  in  their 
infancy,  except  the  few  re-baptized  among  the  Anabap- 
tists !'''- 

Is  not  this  a  serious  thought  to  a  believer  in  the  Bi- 
ble, and  member  of  the  Christian  Church,  that  none  of 
our  Reformers,  the  translators  of  the  Bible,  and  the 
long  galaxy  of  great  and  good  men  who  have  written 
commentaries,  and  handed  down  so  many  learned  and 

*  And  these  missionaries  having  been  baptized  themselves  in  in- 
fancy^ were  not  baptized  at  all  according  to  the  Baptist  theory,  hence 
could  not  give  lawful  baptism,  and  therefore  baptism  was  lost,  and 
the  Church  had  come  to  an  end  long  before  the  Reformation,  and  the 
''Gates  of  Hell"  has  prevailed  against  it!  although  our  Saviour  ex- 
pressly declared  the  contrary.  So  the  Baptist  theory  is  wrong  or  our 
Saviour  was  a  false  prophet.  Read  and  see.  Roger  Williams  in  a 
few  years  saw  this  dilemma  and  left  them,  [the  Baptists,]  admitting 
that  baptism  had  been  lost,  and  could  not  be  restored  unless  an  angel 
should  be  sent  from  heaven  with  a  new-commission! !  Which  shall 
we  adopt,  infant  baptism  and  the  continuance  of  Christ's  visible 
church  on  earth,  or  a  theory  that  excludes  little  children,  destroys 
the  church,  and  makes  the  Saviour  a  false  prophet? 


CONCLUDmG  REMARKS.  417 

pious  works  on  the  doctrines  of  our  religion,  and  work- 
ings of  the  Holy  Spirit,  were  baptized  and  members  of 
Christ's  Church  !  Yes — if  the  doctrine  of  the  Baptists 
be  true — none  of  them  were  baptized  except  the  few  re- 
baptized  by  the  Anabaptists,  after  the  work  of  the  Re- 
formation was  nearly  completed  !  What  better  argument 
needs  the  infidel  ? 

But  this  is  not  all ;  none  of  us  are  now  members  of 
Christ's  visible  Church,  who  have  not  been  immersed  in 
water  on  a  profession  of  faith.  The  whole  question  of 
membership  is  made  to  depend  upon  the  manner  of  per- 
forming one  of  the  rites  of  the  Church  !  They  carry 
out  this  principle,  and  allow  no  one  to  commune  w^ith 
them  in  the  sacrament  of  the  Supper,  who  has  not  been 
baptized  according  to  their  particular  mode.  He  cannot 
enjoy  this  great  and  essential  privilege  of  God's  peo- 
ple— this  distinctive  right  of  the  members  of  Christ's 
body  is  not  to  be  granted  him  !  Why  ?  he  is  not  a 
member.  Why  not  a  member  ?  Because  he  has  not 
been  immersed.  Therefore,  in  the  mode  of  performing 
a  rite,  depends  our  membership  in  the  visible  Church  of 
Christ — aye,  depends  the  existence  of  the  Church  itself! 
There  is  no  Church  when  there  is  no  immersion ! 

To  what  a  condition  does  this  bring  the  Church  of 
God  on  earth,  and  place  all  the  great  and  good  men, 
whose  names  we  so  much  reverence,  and  to  whose  teach- 
ing we  are  so  much  indebted  for  our.  Christian  instruc- 
tion? On  the  same  principle,  where  was  the  Church 
when  no  believers  were  baptized  ?  And  when  the  Church 
was  lost,  h.o^Y  was  it  recovered. again?  If  when  that  was 
lost  the   Church  became   extinct,  who   but   God   could 


418  CONCLUDING  REMARKS. 

begin  it  again?  Roger  Williams  afterwards  saw  tlie 
dilemma  into  which  this  theory  of  the  Baptists  must 
bring  the  Church,  and  came  to  the  conclusion  that 
"baptism  was  lost,  and  could  not  be  restored  unless 
an  angel  from  Heaven  was  sent  to  give  it  to  the  world 
again,"  and  left  them.  And  if  baptism  was  lost,  so  was 
the  Church  also,  as  the  existence  of  the  latter  depended 
on  the  former  ! 

So  much  for  the  assumptions  and  theories  of  men.  If 
the  continuance  of  the  visible  Church  is  to  depend  on 
the  succession  of  baptism  as  its  sign,  it  must  be  the  suc- 
cession of  infant  baptism.  Every  historian  will  admit 
that.  And  we  must  leave  it  with  those  who  regard  it 
as  so  "damnable  a  heresy  and  cause  of  so  much  evil," 
to  reconcile  facts  with  their  theory. 

Another  modern  teacher  of  the  same  school  to  which 
we  have  referred,  w^ould  make  infant  baptism  responsible 
for  nearly  all  the  evils  that  ever  afflicted  the  Church  of 
God.* 

We  have  never  read,  perhaps,  in  the  same  space, 
such  a  number  of  unauthorized  statements  and  array  of 
false  deductions.  We  shall  not  follow  him,  but  notice 
his  congratulation  to  his  own  Church,  as  less  liable  to 
corruptions  and  divisions  than  others.  Is  he  really  not 
aware  of  the  fact,  that  many  more  divisions  and  corrup- 
tions have  sprung  up  among  Antipedobaptists  since  their 
origin  than  among  all  others  ?  In  the  very  beginning 
their  creed  was  mingled  with  Manicheism  and  Socinian- 
ism,  and  a  motley  crowd  of  undigested  principles,  that 
require  a  long  time  to  be  reduced  to  a  consistent  system. 
•'^  Dr.  Howell. 


CONCLUDING  REMARKS.  419 

And  scarcely  were  they  organized  under  their  present 
name,  before  thej  were  divided  into  General  and  Parti- 
cular Baptists ;  then  Open  Communion  and  Free  Com- 
munion Baptists ;  Seventh  Day  Baptists,  to  which  a  long 
train  has  followed,  such  as  Seven  Principle  Baptists ; 
Free  Will  Baptists ;  Church  of  God  Baptists ;  Hard  Shell 
Baptists ;  Soft  Shell  Baptists ;  Little  Children  Baptists ; 
Christian  Baptists;  Ironside  Baptists;  Scotch  Baptists; 
Campbellite  Baptists,  or  Reformers ;  Dunkers ;  Mormons, 
and  a  host  of  others,  all  of  whom  are  Antipedobaptists. 
Some  of  these  may  be  the  same  bodies,  called  by  differ- 
ent names,  but  there  are  many  more,  and  no  two  hold 
precisely  the  same  principles.  The  author  of  the  Biog- 
raphia  Britannica  Literaria,  informs  us  there  are  some 
eighty  sects  that  have  sprung  from  the  Anabaptists  of 
the  sixteenth  century  spread  through  Europe  and  Ame- 
rica. And  yet  the  Baptist  Church  is  based  on  a  system 
that  cannot  be  corrupted  ! 

Whether  the  discussion  of  baptismal  regeneration  is 
to  prove  a  blessing  or  injury  to  the  Church  of  God,  is 
yet  to  be  determined.  Certainly  it  has  not  produced  the 
divisions  and  heresies  of  Antipedobaptism.  Our  Bap- 
tist brethren  claim  to  be  friends  of  Christian  liberty, 
and  boast  of  being  the  first  advocates  of  true  religious 
toleration ;  but  the  signs  of  the  times  do  not  augur  that 
power  in  their  hands  will  be  any  less  liable  to  abuse 
than  in  the  hands  of  others.  Their  proceedings  in  the 
Bible  questions,  the  productions  of  some  of  their  later 
writers,  and  their  manner  of  teaching  in  public  and  in 
private,  cause  us  to  fear  the  scenes  of  Munster  might  be 
acted  over  again. 


420  CONCLUDING  REMARKS. 

And  while  we  claim  the  liberty  to  defend  our  own 
principles  and  our  own  firesides,  we  grant  them  the 
same.  And  though  we  may  have  written  earnestly  and 
plainly,  we  have  endeavored  to  do  so  in  a  Christian 
spirit,  certainly  as  much  so  as  our  opponents.  Nor  do 
we  intend  that  difference  of  opinion,  where  w^e  have  the 
right  to  differ,  shall  affect  our  social  intercourse  with 
Christians  of  a  different  name.  "We  have  near  and  dear 
friends  among  the  Baptists,  whom  we  highly  respect, 
and  with  whom  we  have  spent  sweet  intercourse.  We 
do  not  fear  that  by  this  publication  we  shall  offend  the 
generous  and  liberal  minded;  and  if  others  choose  to 
stand  aloof,  we  shall  give  them  their  choice  in  doing  so. 

It  is  known  that  we  hold  these  principles,  and  it  is 
certainly  more  manly  and  open  to  publish  them  for  all, 
than  teach  them  privately  from  house  to  house,  and 
introduce  them  where  not  acceptable,  and  enforce  them 
where  people  are  not  able  to  combat  them. 

We  now  close  this  work  by  earnestly  requesting  our 
readers  to  weigh  well  the  facts  and  principles  herein 
contained.  The  principle  involved  is  of  more  import- 
ance than  is  generally  supposed.  Our  children  will 
never  be  trained  and  instructed  as  they  ought  to  be,  till 
we  learn  the  responsibility  resting  upon  us,  in  regard  to 
them ;  and  until  we  dedicate  them  to  God  in  good  faith, 
train  them  as  his  children,  as  Christians  from  childhood, 
pledged  and  bound  to  the  service  of  their  Redeemer. 


THE     END. 


Princeton  Theological  Seminary-Speer  Library 


1    1012  01021   3603 


